Britain will survive mate we're good at it, nobody thinks its going to be sunshine and roses but do you seriously think we won't export to Europe and import for them as well,money talks in Europe and they do profit substantially from the UK.I agree we'll have to expand export markets but as regards imports what do we import from Europe that can't be sourced elsewhere on planet earth, often cheaper.
Those issues will be addressed, but it isn't my main concern. To some people the state of the NHS is the major concern, others it's education. For me it's the EU, something I consider an authoritarian, undemocratic hierachy that I once admired and even defended but now despise, and I made my voice and objection known when I made the vote I did. Others may disagree, indeed some may find my stance an exaggeration and they are welcome to their opinions but it will do little to sway my own.meantime health, education, transport and so on just aren't an issue for 2 years then they start to formulate a plan? I am sure you are right in your interpretation of what May wants to do but if people vote for that then they get what they deserve. Crap services and higher taxes. Not that May will admit nor discuss that in the campaign.
You only have to weigh up where we make money in the world to see that's not quite right out of the top ten how many are in the EU, I'll give you a clue its less than 2 and more than none.Of our fastest rising export markets non happen to be in the EU while our fastest falling markets are. If I'm being honest purely looking at the figures I'd say its delusional thinking that's where the UKs future is.An accepted rule of thumb is double the distance half the trade - because of increased costs. We will not replace lost trade with the EU with trade elsewhere with any ease. We will continue to trade with the EU but if you look at others that do they have to cede some controls and /or some money to the EU for that benefit - the idea we will get away scot free is delusional.
You only have to weigh up where we make money in the world to see that's not quite right out of the top ten how many are in the EU, I'll give you a clue its less than 2 and more than none.Of our fastest rising export markets non happen to be in the EU while our fastest falling markets are. If I'm being honest purely looking at the figures I'd say its delusional thinking that's where the UKs future is.
We certainly will,barring the promised WW3 the sun will still rise in the morning and there'll still be work to be done and tax to pay.we shall see
So make your choice on June 8th accordingly.what negotiations have the Tories done so far? What have they said they have progressed on? What are their true aims?
They won't say - and probably for good reason - but what the Tories are actually saying is trust us we will do what is best and what we secure will be the best we can get you will have to stick with that. Others are saying trust us we will see what we can get and put it back to Parliament to decide whether its acceptable or trust us we will get the best we can then maybe put it back before you for acceptance before we ratify.
Nothing has been done as yet other than both sides running around the ring looking menacing at each other
well thats one place we disagree as I think it was as much the Leave campaigns place to have some idea of what we should do in the event of their winning - the absolute vacuum they filled with their backstabbing of each other was criminal - I'd have been happier if Dave had accepted that there were two possible results and told the Leave campaign at the outset that they needed to draw up plans. Of course he felt that to even contemplate such a thing never mind do it publicly was a no-no
The political elite serve their own interests.
Mandelson, Kinnock, publically rejected by the British electorate, now have cushy positions within the EU, dedicated to promoting further European integration. Whatever the EU was supposed to uphold, promote and benefit no longer exists. Many of us have seen the detriments to continued EU membership and voted in accordance to that yet still we had people like Mandelson, Blair, Izzard, Geldof, telling us we were wrong. Ever since we've had the pro-EU remainers championing their efforts to overturn a democratic result. Look at the recent narrative of 'Gina Millers tactical voting' campaign. They don't want Brexit to happen; that's understandable as there were many people who were against this decision.
But to suggest that this snap election is not or should not be the defining answer as to the 'mandate' of what direction the British electorate wants the UK Parlaiment to go in regarding Brexit, means that the pro-EU remainers will simply reject ANY method which solidifies the decision taken last June. To me that is an unacceptable stance to hold given the reality of the snap election being called; this is precisely the right decision and the definitive decsion to all those who still regard Brexit and the decision to hold a referendum as folly.
If those parties which have publically stated their oppostion to the result of the EU referendum recieve the most MP's in Parlaiment, then THAT should be regarded as the mandate that the British public on a whole have rejected the 'hard Brexit' stance presented by the parties that support and accept the result of the June EU Referendum, just as that any party that DOES support the result and will honour the result to conclude the UK's exit from the EU should be equally respected and seen as the will of the people.
I think that you should exercise your democratic right to vote LabourIt's not just about Brexit though is it? The Tories are running our schools into the ground, grinding the NHS into dust, ready to be sold on, record numbers of people using food banks, record levels of child poverty. Disabled and vulnerable people being deprived of essential services and care, anybody who cheats the government out of benefits is hounded like a criminal, yet bankers and companies who cheat the tax man out of millions, are let off.
Prices are rocketing up, this country is in a fucking disgrace, people are being turned against each other by lies and manipulation of the government and Tory backed media.
The only reason May has called this snap election ( even though she promised she wouldn't ) is because there are 30 Tory MP's are about to be charged for electoral fraud and will be banned from sitting in the House, thus removing Tory parliamentary majority, she's hoping that the election comes first.
Its a tough decision isn't it, voting for a party who wants to save the NHS, tackle tax avoidance, housing issues, child poverty, or one that wants to screw everybody who isn't a rich wanker into dust while aligning themselves with Saudia Arabia. But no, carry on believing the Tory propaganda pumped out by, yes you guessed it, Tory backed newspapers and media outlets.
Precisely. They'd be putting so much pressure on the Conservatives, suggesting they were cowards or shying away from the issue of Brexit that it would weaken their stance in the EU negotiations. They'd be seen as weak, not having the wider support of UK citizens so either way they'd have to call a snap election. The fact that Labour are so far behind the polls is irrelevant, though I don't doubt a sense of being in a dominant position made the decision much easier, but then Labour would have done the same thing."But to suggest that this snap election is not or should not be the defining answer as to the 'mandate' of what direction the British electorate wants the UK Parliament to go in regarding Brexit........."
You can be sure that if the polls etc. were indicating that May would lose then the Remainers on here would absolutely be saying that the election is about the Brexit issue - they are just fighting a rear-guard action. They have been at Westminster since June - hence the need to call the election.
We know its sold out but loads don't turn up unless its a big gameThey slate us for empty seats when we've sold out though.
An accepted rule of thumb is double the distance half the trade - because of increased costs. We will not replace lost trade with the EU with trade elsewhere with any ease. We will continue to trade with the EU but if you look at others that do they have to cede some controls and /or some money to the EU for that benefit - the idea we will get away scot free is delusional.
Those other countries that trade with the EU without being members of the EU have limited agreements on goods and services- they are not fully comprehensive agreements. Even these limited agreements require MRA's to avoid trading on WTO terms.
If you want a comprehensive deal with the EU then for them agreement on non trade issues like immigration and ECJ rulings become important conditions ,( we might not like that, but it is a fact).So to get a full ( or fullish) trade deal you may not have to be a member of the EU but you will certainly have to agree to concessions on immigration, ECJ and maybe cough up a fair wedge for the privilege of getting access to the large EU market.
well thats one place we disagree as I think it was as much the Leave campaigns place to have some idea of what we should do in the event of their winning - the absolute vacuum they filled with their backstabbing of each other was criminal - I'd have been happier if Dave had accepted that there were two possible results and told the Leave campaign at the outset that they needed to draw up plans. Of course he felt that to even contemplate such a thing never mind do it publicly was a no-no
It is a fact. Go read up about the Canada EU trade deal.This is not a fact. The most recent trade deal I can remember being discussed/pushed through by the EU was with Canada. To my knowledge, they aren't having to accept freedom of movement, be ruled by a foreign court or pay extreme amounts to the EU.
Why does the fact that we are closer to the EU geographically mean that such a trade deal is off the table and it's either single market membership (with all the crap that comes with it) or WTO trading (with penalising tariffs to both parties)?
It is a fact. Go read up about the Canada EU trade deal.
It is very restricted in trade in services and financial services and is nowhere near the level of access in these services we enjoy with the EU ( services are 80% of our exports by the way).
As for goods (apart from cars)rules of origin checks still apply between Canada and the EU.That is something we would wish to avoid between EU and UK post Brexit.
Not all agricultural products are covered.
In other words to return to my original point it is nowhere near as full and comprehensive as the deal we currently have with the EU.
I don't think anyone expects our trade with the EU to be as comprehensive as it is now with us outside the single market. The question is if it will be satisfactory or not.
I'm very confident that we can make up the likely drop in trade by increasing our trade with other nations around the world (many of whom are growing much faster than the EU).
In your opinion.Balls. The EU is on our doorstep making trade easy - it is also the route on the way to other countries so if we are outside the customs union we would be in a right mess and limited by our own transportation links. Trade with the far east is generally imports we pay for so that does nothing for our balance of payments (buying more Chinese tat is not going to help us). The US will do a deal with the EU before us leaving us in no better place and potentially worse. I'm not even going into pass-porting rights for our big financial firms which is our single biggest export. The argument that trade gets anything other than worse after brexit is completely flawed. Its rubbish.
I'd agree that although it's left leaning it shows as little bias as possible given the fact it employs humans.
In your opinion.
Many would disagree.
Pass-porting is so last year. MiFID II will makes it an obsolete concept.