Hard or Soft Brexit?

[londonblue]

I think building houses pre-dates the Cameron government so as idea theft I'm not sure that really rings true.

If your analysis of Labour policy will only run as far as 'they're going to lose the election' maybe analyse Tory policy instead?

It's the number that's the steal. 1 million is a big number that people like to hear.

 

[southendkid]

Good to see labour promising to build 1 million new homes. I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before...now where was it...oh yes, it was Camercsum.

Labour stealing tory policies? Wonders will never cease.

Of course, the reason the tories didn't actually achieve this is the same reason labour won't. Apart from the fact that they're going to lose this election big time, it's because it is much harder to build houses than it is to say.

I wouldn't really call that stealing, it's not like that promise was made a couple of weeks ago. It was made last election and wasn't fulfilled, it seems fair game to me for another party to say they'll do it if the Tories won't.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Good to see labour promising to build 1 million new homes. I'm sure I've heard that somewhere before...now where was it...oh yes, it was Camercsum.

Labour stealing tory policies? Wonders will never cease.

Of course, the reason the tories didn't actually achieve this is the same reason labour won't. Apart from the fact that they're going to lose this election big time, it's because it is much harder to build houses than it is to say.

That is,of course,over a 5 year Parliamentary term ie 200,000 new builds per year.A realistic target.

 

[londonblue]

That is,of course,over a 5 year Parliamentary term ie 200,000 new builds per year.A realistic target.

Which won't be met because it's far harder to build houses than it is to say you will build houses, as Camerscum found out.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Which won't be met because it's far harder to build houses than it is to say you will build houses, as Camerscum found out.

Both Nye Bevan and Harold Macmillan managed to reach this target in post WW2 Britain.No reason why Labour (or the Tories for that matter couldn't,given the political will).

 

[londonblue]

Both Nye Bevan and Harold Macmillan managed to reach this target in post WW2 Britain.No reason why Labour (or the Tories for that matter couldn't,given the political will).

They won't. Mind you, they won't get the chance to be proved right or wrong.

 

[rigsby]

Both Nye Bevan and Harold Macmillan managed to reach this target in post WW2 Britain.No reason why Labour (or the Tories for that matter couldn't,given the political will).

The country wasn't full of Nimbys back then and many of the houses were built by small builders and self builds as there were far more small building plots available.

 

[Benfleet A1]

The country wasn't full of Nimbys back then and many of the houses were built by small builders and self builds as there were far more small building plots available.

And the fact that we were rebuilding as a country after WW2. A simple fact overlooked by 'he who must be ignored' just to take a cheap swipe as per usual. Something that never gets suggested is pre builds from Germany. Cheaper than brick built and quicker as well. Once land is released, entire estates could be created at a fraction of the cost.

Take a look at some of these places available, they are quite impressive.

 

[rigsby]

And the fact that we were rebuilding as a country after WW2. A simple fact overlooked by 'he who must be ignored' just to take a cheap swipe as per usual. Something that never gets suggested is pre builds from Germany. Cheaper than brick built and quicker as well. Once land is released, entire estates could be created at a fraction of the cost.

Take a look at some of these places available, they are quite impressive.

I think that was part of the failed Tory plan to have 1m homes by 2020.

The problem will still be releasing the land. In Hullbridge they have still not started the 500 homes that were first put forward about 30 years ago and how many different governments and councils have we had in that time. The problem being that house building is seen as a vote loser by local councillors. As was a new football stadium in Southend all those years ago because remember we were going to be one of the first back in the 80's.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

A bit of inconvenient truth, for all those living in British negotiating strength lalaland, from a leave voter. It tends to come back to my earlier thoughts, that a soft Brexit will not be possible. I don't see this as contradictory to my position of having a second referendum on the negotiated deal............or rather, no deal.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-eu-27-countries-europe-lining-up-oppose-us-brexit-britain-union-works-a7707096.html

A refreshingly honest - and forward thinking - piece from a brexiteer.

I'm well-versed in EU law and I've posted several times on here the clear construction of Art 50(2) which has to be read in conjunction with other articles of the Lisbon Treaty, e.g. Art 217.

There is no such thing as a 'soft' brexit. Art 50(2) makes it clear that the agreement that will be negotiated is one by which 'the treaties shall cease to apply'. It is not a trade negotiation. The most the EU27 have to do is 'take account of' (not 'discuss', never mind 'agree') the "framework of the future relationship". If you think this language creates an obligation for the EU27 to agree a trade deal you simply do not understand rules of legal construction. The EU27 could agree something on trade but only if they want to.

The problem with O'Grady's view that the benefits in 10 - 20 years time will justify the short term damage to the economy is that this is analysing one issue in isolation and not factoring in the next major problem the UK will face - the unbalanced population profile.

At the moment a significant proportion of the population is aged 40 to 54. A high proportion of this demographic are in work. Relatively speaking they are net contributors to the Treasury.



The size of the population currently aged 20 to 39 is markedly lower. In 15 to 25 years’ time we will have a significant population aged over 65 but not enough taxpayers to cover their pension and NHS care costs.


I wonder if this age group will then still think that restricting immigration is a good idea.



A refreshingly honest - and forward thinking - piece from a brexiteer.

I'm well-versed in EU law and I've posted several times on here the clear construction of Art 50(2) which has to be read in conjunction with other articles of the Lisbon Treaty, e.g. Art 217.

There is no such thing as a 'soft' brexit. Art 50(2) makes it clear that the agreement that will be negotiated is one by which 'the treaties shall cease to apply'. It is not a trade negotiation. The most the EU27 have to do is 'take account of' (not 'discuss', never mind 'agree') the "framework of the future relationship". If you think this language creates an obligation for the EU27 to agree a trade deal you simply do not understand rules of legal construction. The EU27 could agree something on trade but only if they want to.

The problem with O'Grady's view that the benefits in 10 - 20 years time will justify the short term damage to the economy is that this is analysing one issue in isolation and not factoring in the next major problem the UK will face - the unbalanced population profile.

At the moment a significant proportion of the population is aged 40 to 54. A high proportion of this demographic are in work. Relatively speaking they are net contributors to the Treasury.



The size of the population currently aged 20 to 39 is markedly lower. In 15 to 25 years’ time we will have a significant population aged over 65 but not enough taxpayers to cover their pension and NHS care costs.


I wonder if this age group will then still think that restricting immigration is a good idea.


A refreshingly honest - and forward thinking - piece from a brexiteer.

I'm well-versed in EU law and I've posted several times on here the clear construction of Art 50(2) which has to be read in conjunction with other articles of the Lisbon Treaty, e.g. Art 217.

There is no such thing as a 'soft' brexit. Art 50(2) makes it clear that the agreement that will be negotiated is one by which 'the treaties shall cease to apply'. It is not a trade negotiation. The most the EU27 have to do is 'take account of' (not 'discuss', never mind 'agree') the "framework of the future relationship". If you think this language creates an obligation for the EU27 to agree a trade deal you simply do not understand rules of legal construction. The EU27 could agree something on trade but only if they want to.

The problem with O'Grady's view that the benefits in 10 - 20 years time will justify the short term damage to the economy is that this is analysing one issue in isolation and not factoring in the next major problem the UK will face - the unbalanced population profile.

At the moment a significant proportion of the population is aged 40 to 54. A high proportion of this demographic are in work. Relatively speaking they are net contributors to the Treasury.



The size of the population currently aged 20 to 39 is markedly lower. In 15 to 25 years’ time we will have a significant population aged over 65 but not enough taxpayers to cover their pension and NHS care costs.


I wonder if this age group will then still think that restricting immigration is a good idea.


A refreshingly honest - and forward thinking - piece from a brexiteer.

I'm well-versed in EU law and I've posted several times on here the clear construction of Art 50(2) which has to be read in conjunction with other articles of the Lisbon Treaty, e.g. Art 217.

There is no such thing as a 'soft' brexit. Art 50(2) makes it clear that the agreement that will be negotiated is one by which 'the treaties shall cease to apply'. It is not a trade negotiation. The most the EU27 have to do is 'take account of' (not 'discuss', never mind 'agree') the "framework of the future relationship". If you think this language creates an obligation for the EU27 to agree a trade deal you simply do not understand rules of legal construction. The EU27 could agree something on trade but only if they want to.

The problem with O'Grady's view that the benefits in 10 - 20 years time will justify the short term damage to the economy is that this is analysing one issue in isolation and not factoring in the next major problem the UK will face - the unbalanced population profile.

At the moment a significant proportion of the population is aged 40 to 54. A high proportion of this demographic are in work. Relatively speaking they are net contributors to the Treasury.



The size of the population currently aged 20 to 39 is markedly lower. In 15 to 25 years’ time we will have a significant population aged over 65 but not enough taxpayers to cover their pension and NHS care costs.


I wonder if this age group will then still think that restricting immigration is a good idea.



A refreshingly honest - and forward thinking - piece from a brexiteer.

I'm well-versed in EU law and I've posted several times on here the clear construction of Art 50(2) which has to be read in conjunction with other articles of the Lisbon Treaty, e.g. Art 217.

There is no such thing as a 'soft' brexit. Art 50(2) makes it clear that the agreement that will be negotiated is one by which 'the treaties shall cease to apply'. It is not a trade negotiation. The most the EU27 have to do is 'take account of' (not 'discuss', never mind 'agree') the "framework of the future relationship". If you think this language creates an obligation for the EU27 to agree a trade deal you simply do not understand rules of legal construction. The EU27 could agree something on trade but only if they want to.

The problem with O'Grady's view that the benefits in 10 - 20 years time will justify the short term damage to the economy is that this is analysing one issue in isolation and not factoring in the next major problem the UK will face - the unbalanced population profile.

At the moment a significant proportion of the population is aged 40 to 54. A high proportion of this demographic are in work. Relatively speaking they are net contributors to the Treasury.



The size of the population currently aged 20 to 39 is markedly lower. In 15 to 25 years’ time we will have a significant population aged over 65 but not enough taxpayers to cover their pension and NHS care costs.


I wonder if this age group will then still think that restricting immigration is a good idea.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Opening negociating positions?.........................or a bridge too far???

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/theresa-may-jean-claude-juncker-angela-merkel-meeting-brexit-negotiations-speech-eu-summit-a7711206.html

and a rather fuller take on the same meeting. As a UK citizen, living in mainland Europe, it doesn't fill me with confidence. :sad:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before


The Telegraph is also running the same story, with the same slant.

 

[callan]

Opening negociating positions?.........................or a bridge too far???

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/theresa-may-jean-claude-juncker-angela-merkel-meeting-brexit-negotiations-speech-eu-summit-a7711206.html

and a rather fuller take on the same meeting. As a UK citizen, living in mainland Europe, it doesn't fill me with confidence. :sad:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before


The Telegraph is also running the same story, with the same slant.

Think this is more to do with the GE than a negotiating position per se.

May knows that if the EU are seen to be bullying the UK, and she is standing up to them this will go down well with the electorate, also what I would expect to see soon is that the UK will be joining (possibly forming) ready made trade blocs such as NAFTA.

Juncker is doing what he's always done by using Merkel to put pressure on.

 

[callan]

Opening negociating positions?.........................or a bridge too far???

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/theresa-may-jean-claude-juncker-angela-merkel-meeting-brexit-negotiations-speech-eu-summit-a7711206.html

and a rather fuller take on the same meeting. As a UK citizen, living in mainland Europe, it doesn't fill me with confidence. :sad:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before


The Telegraph is also running the same story, with the same slant.

Think this is more to do with the GE than a negotiating position per se.

May knows that if the EU are seen to be bullying the UK, and she is standing up to them this will go down well with the electorate, also what I would expect to see soon is that the UK will be joining (possibly forming) ready made trade blocs such as NAFTA.

Juncker is doing what he's always done by using Merkel to put pressure on....the exception being the UK is not Greece.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Hadn't heard of Professor Michael Dougan last year. I found it quite fascinating, in retrospect, to hear his views prior to the referendum vote. Many of the simple facts resonate znd are relavent to the present situation.

https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/

The same proffesor now offers his views on the need for the forthcoming General Election and about, what he sees, as the governments flawed Brexit strategy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i529NnS0MI

 

[callan]

Hadn't heard of Professor Michael Dougan last year. I found it quite fascinating, in retrospect, to hear his views prior to the referendum vote. Many of the simple facts resonate znd are relavent to the present situation.

https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/

The same proffesor now offers his views on the need for the forthcoming General Election and about, what he sees, as the governments flawed Brexit strategy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i529NnS0MI

I see the good Professor is still not biting the hand that feeds.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Think this is more to do with the GE than a negotiating position per se.

May knows that if the EU are seen to be bullying the UK, and she is standing up to them this will go down well with the electorate, also what I would expect to see soon is that the UK will be joining (possibly forming) ready made trade blocs such as NAFTA.

Juncker is doing what he's always done by using Merkel to put pressure on....the exception being the UK is not Greece.

The trouble is, as Professor Dougan explains, the General Election is being held on a false premise. Surely it is May who is playing games, hiding from the general public the vacant truth of her and her governments Brexit strategy. We are not talking about taking up postures prior to negociations beginning. The gulf between the two sides is completely unbridgeable and on that basis there can be no chance of an agreement. If May is ignorant to that fact she is stupid.........if she is aware, as I'm sure she is, she is deliberately misleading the British public and failing to inform them of the consequences her actions will bring about.

 

[callan]

The trouble is, as Professor Dougan explains, the General Election is being held on a false premise. Surely it is May who is playing games, hiding from the general public the vacant truth of her and her governments Brexit strategy. We are not talking about taking up postures prior to negociations beginning. The gulf between the two sides is completely unbridgeable and on that basis there can be no chance of an agreement. If May is ignorant to that fact she is stupid.........if she is aware, as I'm sure she is, she is deliberately misleading the British public and failing to inform them of the consequences her actions will bring about.

The Professor is largely doing what he did pre the Referendum...which is building straw men to knock down.

May set out in her Lancaster house speech a vision of Brexit, doubtless this will be seen in some shape or form in the Manifesto, I expect alongside some positive signals to the 85 per cent of the world who are not EU members.
Labour have also offered an insight to Post Brexit UK again I would expect to see more detail in their manifesto.

The EU for their part are holding together through fear and trepidation rather than seeing Brexit for what it truly is...a democratic decision.

The election is thus therefore far from being held on a false premise...it is further opportunity to either endorse last Junes decision by voting Tory, Labour etc or reverse it by voting Lib dem, Green, Snp.

I'm sure even the Good Professor can recognise That should whoever get a mandate to govern in the GE has a strong hand re Brexit.
May has already pointed out that she would walk away if the right deal for the UK is not on the table....if the public support her on this in the GE, then this will give a very clear signal to the EU that posturing is not doing them any good whasoever merely hardening opinion against them in the UK.

It isn't Brexit or the French election that the EU need to worry about though.

 

[superblue24]

How exactly will the EU function with a £9 billion per year reduction in funds? Cuts will need to be made, but who will be happy to be on the receiving end? Or will this mean an increase to premiums for the remaining countries?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...redict-future-Brexit-disunity-Brussels-budget

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

How exactly will the EU function with a £9 billion per year reduction in funds? Cuts will need to be made, but who will be happy to be on the receiving end? Or will this mean an increase to premiums for the remaining countries?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...redict-future-Brexit-disunity-Brussels-budget

They could do worse than getting a bit of money by recycling the Express as toilet paper! :smile::winking: (They'd do even better if they were to add the Mail, Times, Telegraph and Sun to that end)

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

The Professor is largely doing what he did pre the Referendum...which is building straw men to knock down.

May set out in her Lancaster house speech a vision of Brexit, doubtless this will be seen in some shape or form in the Manifesto, I expect alongside some positive signals to the 85 per cent of the world who are not EU members.
Labour have also offered an insight to Post Brexit UK again I would expect to see more detail in their manifesto.

The EU for their part are holding together through fear and trepidation rather than seeing Brexit for what it truly is...a democratic decision.

The election is thus therefore far from being held on a false premise...it is further opportunity to either endorse last Junes decision by voting Tory, Labour etc or reverse it by voting Lib dem, Green, Snp.

I'm sure even the Good Professor can recognise That should whoever get a mandate to govern in the GE has a strong hand re Brexit.
May has already pointed out that she would walk away if the right deal for the UK is not on the table....if the public support her on this in the GE, then this will give a very clear signal to the EU that posturing is not doing them any good whasoever merely hardening opinion against them in the UK.

It isn't Brexit or the French election that the EU need to worry about though.

May's vision of Brexit I don't dispute, only the fact that it's not of this world. You know very well that the positions of the EU and the UK are presently SO far apart, that it would take a collapse from one side or the other to bring about an agreement..............and that's unlikely to happen. (unless Le Pen does you a favour) I don't think the EU gives a flying f**k whether it's a 'democratic decision' neither, I believe, will it make any difference whether May ends up with a majority of 5, 50, 150 (that's what I meant about a false premise)............the EU has its position and has not changed it since the Brexit vote.
With the positions both sides hold there can't be an agreement, so..............one or two questions.

It will take at least the two years for the UK to disentangle itself from the EU, do you agree that no one will negociate with the UK during that time? Do you agree that when we officially leave the EU we will lose all the trade agreements with other countries, negociated under its aegis? Seeing how long it takes to make trade agreements, how long will it take to re-negociate agreements with what..........60 countries? How many civil servants, trained in that field, will be needed for the task?