I meant both sides of the argument here in the UK, not UK vs EU. You may well be correct about the deal as I don't know the details of the negotiations. The fact that you characterise stuff as shit or stupid makes me wonder if you are no better informed than me though and you are just trying to present opinion as fact. This is an issue for both extremes of the debate.What do you mean "both sides"?
Both sides agreed it. One side got buy in from 27 countries and the other side couldn't even get its most strident Brexit supporting MPs to vote for it.
The more I hear about it, that deal was the best we could have got. The fact that it's actually shit is because Brexit itself is shit.
I take your point. I'm not sure anyone actually involved with negotiations did at any point threaten either no deal though. It just seemed to be folk trying to either pressure acceptance of mays deal, or Remainers using it as a bogeyman at home. I accept no deal is bad, but I don't think the deal is any better.It reduces the possibility of an “accidental” No Deal Brexit through idiotic Brinksmanship by Brexit loons. “No Deal” was never a credible card in our negotiation, it was like holding a gun to our own head and hoping the EU would remove it because they didn’t want gunpowder on their shirts. We’ve been threatening it for 2 years and it’s achieved absolutely nothing.
Every single victory like this for the sensible politicians is a step closer to revoking, by whatever means, and from my point of view that is worth celebrating.
We should have begun preparing for no deal the day after the referendum result. The EU are many things but they’re not stupid. They knew May was talking bollocks. They won’t move unless or until they believe no deal is a genuine possibility.I take your point. I'm not sure anyone actually involved with negotiations did at any point threaten either no deal though. It just seemed to be folk trying to either pressure acceptance of mays deal, or Remainers using it as a bogeyman at home. I accept no deal is bad, but I don't think the deal is any better.
Tbf the no deal scenario should have been prepared before the referendum. I seem to recall the planning centered around a remain vote.We should have begun preparing for no deal the day after the referendum result. The EU are many things but they’re not stupid. They knew May was talking bollocks. They won’t move unless or until they believe no deal is a genuine possibility.
Tbf the no deal scenario should have been prepared before the referendum. I seem to recall the planning centered around a remain vote.
There is probably a reasonable level of preparedness somewhere in between what you describe and not preparing at all which is what happened.How? To prepare for a no deal scenario properly would take a decade and cost billions to turn our integrated EU economy into one that could stand alone. And then we vote Remain? Makes no sense.
Leave only worked if nothing changes which was pretty much the entire basis of the Leave campaign. Problem is that ‘nothing changes’ is purile horseshit. Three years later the bill is in and the U.K. hasn’t got the funds to cover it’s reckless bet. Which I guess is why the Tories have called for Captain Kipper to rescue the situation. It’s fucking hilarious.
There is probably a reasonable level of preparedness somewhere in between what you describe and not preparing at all which is what happened.
I'm not sure EU standards are an issue high on any leavers agenda.Not really. You are either an integrated EU economy or you ain’t. You either accept the rules, regs of the EU Single Market or you don’t. You can’t be half in or half out economically even if you can politically. Does the EU set chemical standards or does the U.K.? If it’s the U.K. you need to set up a standards body. With staff and a budget. Everything we outsource to the EU and pay for we have to do ourselves. And if we don’t do it ourselves then why are we leaving?
The £39 billion is relative peanuts and a no-deal would harm us a lot more than the EU, it is not a viable option
The truth of the matter is, there is no ‘good’ deal available.
It would have been hugely controversial to plan for no deal prior to the referendum. It was central to the leave campaign that it would be easy to agree a deal. No deal planning would have been dismissed as part of project fearTbf the no deal scenario should have been prepared before the referendum. I seem to recall the planning centered around a remain vote.
I see preparation for deal, no deal, and indeed remain as a basic responsibility of the civil service / govt prior, during and after the vote. I'm sure most of us in our daily work and domestic lives have to do contingency planning - it's a big part of adulthood. I respect your point regarding the difficulty of no deal and the leave campaign, but you seem to be making an assumption regarding brexit that all or a majority voters were motivated by a deal. There was no mention of any deal on the ballot paper.It would have been hugely controversial to plan for no deal prior to the referendum. It was central to the leave campaign that it would be easy to agree a deal. No deal planning would have been dismissed as part of project fear
I see preparation for deal, no deal, and indeed remain as a basic responsibility of the civil service / govt prior, during and after the vote. I'm sure most of us in our daily work and domestic lives have to do contingency planning - it's a big part of adulthood. I respect your point regarding the difficulty of no deal and the leave campaign, but you seem to be making an assumption regarding brexit that all or a majority voters were motivated by a deal. There was no mention of any deal on the ballot paper.
There’s only one extreme in the debate, and that’s the No Deal Brexiters.I meant both sides of the argument here in the UK, not UK vs EU. You may well be correct about the deal as I don't know the details of the negotiations. The fact that you characterise stuff as shit or stupid makes me wonder if you are no better informed than me though and you are just trying to present opinion as fact. This is an issue for both extremes of the debate.
I think you mean that you only recognise one view as extreme, which is of course your right. I personally think that unless you explore both extremes of a polarised binary debate then it's not possible to define a balanced view - but I accept this may be a bias in my own perception. I'm instinctively wary of anyone who claims to be completely 'right' in what is clearly a complex argument. It's amazing how many folk on either side of the argument claim to have an unarguably correct view and define those that don't agree as idiots,extremists, deluded - pick whatever insult you like.There’s only one extreme in the debate, and that’s the No Deal Brexiters.
No idea - maybe the one he was in danger of pursuing when May removed him from the process?What deal was David Davies talking about when he referred to the
‘Easiest deal in history?’
Yep - there is a common theme amongst those that do not see thisTaking No Deal off the table = removing all leverage = a shit deal = remaining in the EU. Leavers have now wised up to that little ruse.
.....Unless you want to stop brexit entirely of course, in which case it makes perfect sense to torpedo the UK negotiating position and strangle the process in parliamentary red tape.Yep - there is a common theme amongst those that do not see this
But it is not just having it on the table - it needs to be viable
BBC Panorama - just started. Within hours of the shock referendum result Hollande tells Barnier - "the British must pay the price - the survival of the EU is at stake if we let them go easily."
That, in short, is the problem.
No idea - maybe the one he was in danger of pursuing when May removed him from the process?