Another new Brexit thread

[Ban-jani]

You still don't get it do you? Boris had a clear and simple 'get brexit done' message. Workers in their droves voted for this. You are absolutely correct that they voted for the removal of their own rights, but sadly the remain side were too busy playing parliamentary games and patting each other on the back to construct a digestible counter narrative. I'd suggest that's where the worst delusion lay.

A completely side point is that the whole saga proved what a democracy we are. The public got what they wanted in the end.

It’s the wrong decision but at least democracy happened.

 

[mcfc1632]

for what ?

IBS

 

[blueparrot]

I certainly think Johnson prefers to obtain a deal but it is a fact that a no deal outcome is an option. Both sides will have to make concessions in order to reach an agreement so we will see how it all pans out.

Dont think he just prefers it, think he knows it’s essential to his plans for the next 5 years. The promises he’s made for spending need a strong economy he knows that’s all at risk with no deal done and done quickly.

 

[mcfc1632]

I'll be interested to see what Remainers will do when the economy ticks along quite nicely after we leave? Words like disaster, catastrophe, recession, have been thrown around and anyone who disagreed labelled an idiot......

That is why I have been commenting that some posters are actually wishing for bad news.

For me the admirable attitude to take would be akin to what we have seen from @Chippy_boy and @Ban-jani.

They have not turned coat from their position of years that Remain was the better choice - they have just shown a level of objectivity to recognise what is happening and the character to act with some balance and maturity and discuss the future rather than bitch and whinge about the past


Disappointly - and in just a few cases surprisingly - others have not shown that strength of character, but prefer to run the UK down and hope for bad news for the UK.

Why - can any Leavers (not blinkered Remainers) offer any sense of explanation that does not lead to the obvious conclusion that it is just their lack of balance and objectivity? - the need for them to be seen to win?

There are so many posts in which they deceive themselves/each other - but nobody else - in which they claim to be holding the government to account and other such self-delusional prattle - such is their need to keep on moaning and carping but not be able to recognise that is what - and all - they are doing

 

[blueinsa]

Yes it’s fucking hilarious how deluded some people are and quite touching that they have such faith in the Johnson led government to look after their interests. Why do they think workers rights will be protected when the clause of the WA protecting them was quietly removed after the election.

Because it would be political suicide for any political party in this country to legislate to take workers rights away.

We do get to vote government in and out dependant on how good they are you know, its not like the EU at the top where you get people forced onto you ;-)

 

[BobKowalski]

Because it would be political suicide for any political party in this country to legislate to take workers rights away.

We do get to vote government in and out dependant on how good they are you know, its not like the EU at the top where you get people forced onto you ;-)

Scotland, NI and Wales having been told to lump it may disagree with you on that...

 

[dave_blue12]

Just pretend everything that is being said is true and go along with it.

Its a bit like playing a board game with the kids in which they invent rules, you go along with them and allow them to "win" as it avoids the temper tantrum that follows.

No problem, I'm all in favour of understanding the realities.

Which you clearly don't. Like I said spouting shit about something you don't understand just makes you look stupid, something you and your buddies on here are exceptionally good at.

Lol !

 

[bluethrunthru]

Interestingly enough I saw some of the post PMQ coverage where it seems Corbyn had to explain to Johnson that those fortunate enough to work at Greggs but unfortunate enough to get in work benefits in an area where Universal Credit has been rolled out can only take £75 of the £300 bonus the company was awarding them otherwise it fucks up their UC entitlement.

Why am I not surprised that Johnson - part of the Govt who brought it in - doesn't know how it works and also that the Fail/Torygraph/Sun et al only reported the £300 not the actual entitlement of many Greggs workers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51208542

 

[blueinsa]

No problem, I'm all in favour of understanding the realities.

Which you clearly don't. Like I said spouting shit about something you don't understand just makes you look stupid, something you and your buddies on here are exceptionally good at.

Lol !

Lol!

 

[west didsblue]

Because it would be political suicide for any political party in this country to legislate to take workers rights away.

We do get to vote government in and out dependant on how good they are you know, its not like the EU at the top where you get people forced onto you ;-)

That would explain why they took out the provision protecting workers rights from the WA.

 

[blueinsa]

Interestingly enough I saw some of the post PMQ coverage where it seems Corbyn had to explain to Johnson that those fortunate enough to work at Greggs but unfortunate enough to get in work benefits in an area where Universal Credit has been rolled out can only take £75 of the £300 bonus the company was awarding them otherwise it fucks up their UC entitlement.

Why am I not surprised that Johnson - part of the Govt who brought it in - doesn't know how it works and also that the Fail/Torygraph/Sun et al only reported the £300 not the actual entitlement of many Greggs workers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51208542

Is it any different to being taxed on bonuses?

Let me guess a Labour government wouldn't take any tax and would not take any income into account for those on benefits?

Fucking lala land on here at times.

 

[blueinsa]

That would explain why they took out the provision protecting workers rights from the WA.

Again, you need to invent a policy that hasnt even come to pass to fit a narrative.

If they think they can take away workers rights they wont win the next GE its simple.

 

[mcfc1632]

Interesting, I take the opposite view, that we need maximum flexibility to negotiate effective trade deals with the growing economies outside the EU. The EU is fucked imo, and Brexit provides us with a fantastic opportunity which we need to be free to grasp with both hands.

That is the only independent and objective way to view things IMO

TBF - it is well known that so many people are rendered anxious and uncertain by change - and Brexit does represent major change - so I guess it is to be expected that some will be somewhat paralysed and unable to cope until they have more direction and certainty to steer their thoughts.

 

[west didsblue]

Again, you need to invent a policy that hasnt even come to pass to fit a narrative.

If they think they can take away workers rights they wont win the next GE its simple.

Not sure what you’re on about.

I’m just stating facts.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.u...w-eu-withdrawal-agreement-bill-whats-changed/
Read the paragraph on what’s been removed and tell me why they’ve done that if they intend to maintain or improve workers’ rights.

 

[BobKowalski]

It's a landmark point as we will no longer be a member of the EU. Obviously, as you say, there will be a negotiation to see what, if any, formal trading relationship we have with the EU.

My preference is for a deal as long as it is equitable but if what is on offer makes no sense (for instance accepting EU law as paramount) then it will have to be WTO terms.

If there is no deal agreed by Jan 1st 2021 then the WA treaty still applies. The absence of a trade deal means under the WA there will be much harder border in the Irish Sea and greater friction in internal UK trade between NI and GB and European law will be applicable in governing trade between NI and GB and vice versa. EU law will also apply to UK business sectors that intersect with NI business and also to any UK wide laws that encompass NI.

This is the EU’s starting position as it undertakes negotiations with the UK. A no deal option on Jan 1st 2021 is not the threat it was first time around. It was also a threat we declined to exercise.

 

[Ban-jani]

That is why I have been commenting that some posters are actually wishing for bad news.

For me the admirable attitude to take would be akin to what we have seen from @Chippy_boy and @Ban-jani.

They have not turned coat from their position of years that Remain was the better choice - they have just shown a level of objectivity and balance to recognise what is happening and the character to act with some balance and maturity and discuss the future rather than bitch and whinge about the past

I just see it pointless to continue over the same ground we have been doing to death for 3 years, arguing the pros and cons of something inevitable. I always like to look forward.

I was surprised to see the IMF report and the news that thousands of European finance companies are looking to move offices to London, which is great for our services sector. I’m not going to deny that positivity because it doesn’t fit with my previous expectations.

The argument was mostly the economy for me and our standing in the world. If there were guarantees about the economy and I had thought we’d do okay, I’d have been a Brexiteer. It now seems we probably will be alright, if not only slightly worse off and therefore my stance on remain has weakened.

Obviously there’s the negotiations to take place still but there’s quite a bit of optimism, by those responsible for predicting, that we will do average... and I’ll take that now.

Plus the GE proved once and for all that the public and those not in metropolitan bubbles, want this and I stand by them and democracy taking place.

 

[Blue Hefner]

Is it any different to being taxed on bonuses?

Let me guess a Labour government wouldn't take any tax and would not take any income into account for those on benefits?

Fucking lala land on here at times.

And its happened already. You are on here defending the fact that a Greggs worker who earns practically nothing(hence UC) should be denied the 'benefit' as you see it as just taxing the bonus. If it is tax it should be taxed in the correct manner, not taken out of a benefit - you will be on here in a couple of years defending how people have conned their way around the points system, despite it previously being pointed out that it is probably unworkable and detrimental. And you are also likely to be on here defending the lack of workers' rights with the line 'the reduction hasn't been that bad, if it was they would have been voted out

The Government knew UC was unworkable and be damaging to many yet they did it anyway and guess what, got voted in again

They will chip, chip and chip away at you until you are on a public form defending them for taking money off a bakery worker who got a £280 one-off bonus.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

If there is no deal agreed by Jan 1st 2021 then the WA treaty still applies. The absence of a trade deal means under the WA there will be much harder border in the Irish Sea and greater friction in internal UK trade between NI and GB and European law will be applicable in governing trade between NI and GB and vice versa. EU law will also apply to UK business sectors that intersect with NI business and also to any UK wide laws that encompass NI.

This is the EU’s starting position as it undertakes negotiations with the UK. A no deal option on Jan 1st 2021 is not the threat it was first time around. It was also a threat we declined to exercise.

That actually adds up to a very small proportion of UK / EU trade. The German products I sell in the UK as an example would be imported under WTO terms. No deal is still a big deal for both parties.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Not sure what you’re on about.

I’m just stating facts.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.u...w-eu-withdrawal-agreement-bill-whats-changed/
Read the paragraph on what’s been removed and tell me why they’ve done that if they intend to maintain or improve workers’ rights.

Simple fact is the legislation defending workers rights was EU wide...... you know those dreadful laws like the right to paid holidays and the right to a safe place of work that was forced upon us by an evil EU - and it couldn't be altered without EU wide agreement. Brexiteers will point to the fact that the govt promises to shadow EU rights and if there is an improvement to EU workers rights it has to be revealed to and debated in the Commons.

Problems with that are

1/ if thats your beef why Leave? You intend to keep the same rights anyway so where is the advantage?
2/ It falls under UK Govt control now so any UK Govt can change/amend/ repeal existing laws to suit.
3/ They have to debate any change or improvement from the EU but don't have to adopt it.

Given that 2 members of the cabinet ( Patel and Raab ) have written a book in which they proclaim the British worker is indolent, idle and workshy and other Tory MP's dislike bodies like Unions that seek to protect workers rights and the Tory Party is funded by employers who like the idea of the repeal of many of the rights of their workers all we have is Johnson's word things won't change. Johnsons word is worth 10% of fuck all as has already been proven since he got elected.

 

[BobKowalski]

I just see it pointless to continue over the same ground we have been doing to death for 3 years, arguing the pros and cons of something inevitable. I always like to look forward.

I was surprised to see the IMF report and the news that thousands of European finance companies are looking to move offices to London, which is great for our services sector. I’m not going to deny that positivity because it doesn’t fit with my previous expectations.

The argument was mostly the economy for me and our standing in the world. If there were guarantees about the economy and I had thought we’d do okay, I’d have been a Brexiteer. It now seems we probably will be alright, if not only slightly worse off and therefore my stance on remain has weakened.

Obviously there’s the negotiations to take place still but there’s quite a bit of optimism, by those responsible for predicting, that we will do average... and I’ll take that now.

Plus the GE proved once and for all that the public and those not in metropolitan bubbles, want this and I stand by them and democracy taking place.

If you cannot have cross border trade then entities will be obliged to set up a presence (even if its only a nameplate) either side of the border. This can apply to financial, legal services, academic research, chemical, Pharma regulations etc. It means you end up spending on duplication which is waste of resource and manpower.

The kicker for most companies is do you spend on a market with 27 countries or a market with just 1? This then comes down to the relative size and importance of the sectors and for financial services London is King so the duplication is worth it especially if the UK side just demands a legal entity to be incorporated. The EU is demanding more than just a legal entity. They want assets and a presence.

But say on Chemicals where there is a Europe wide database do we come out of that or create our own regulatory body with our own testing facilities and procedures? The latter means more jobs and work but for industry it’s duplication and a waste of resource and over time you get market resistance and new procedures and refinements start to lag in the lesser market. That asymmetrical size in the two respective markets will always be our weak spot. Additionally to set up a regulatory regime with facilities etc takes time and we have until October because by then industry sectors need to know what the regulatory framework will be or what the immigration system will be etc so that they can adapt and plan accordingly.

But if we stay in the EU Chemical regulatory sphere or for any other sectors then we are back to ECJ oversight which is a big no no yet we only have 6 months to create and put into place our own regulatory framework so how do we square that one?

Interesting times.