Another new Brexit thread

[chedlee]

I agree - it will be partly down to our standing, but......

It will be mostly be down to being able to operate as an independent state and not being constrained by the EU in how we determine and implement policies for the good of the UK's citizens

The whole notion that any country acts as a truly independent state is questionable, there are constraints placed on them all the time if they deal internationally. We signed up for this particular constraint in good faith and now we are acting in bad faith. That will have repercussions that some people think will matter more that other people do.

 

[blueinsa]

The whole notion that any country acts as a truly independent state is questionable, there are constraints placed on them all the time if they deal internationally. We signed up for this particular constraint in good faith and now we are acting in bad faith. That will have repercussions that some people think will matter more that other people do.

In the short term, the repercussion will be the vast majority make it abundantly clear they are a bunch of idiots who need to think again and roll back on this.

Long term? There won't be any. It will be chip paper in a few weeks time. It wont stop trade deals.

 

[chedlee]

No it is significant, its wrong and i hope we don't do it and said so yesterday.

My issue is most do 2+2 and come out with 5 as the answer. Its always an extreme that will happen when nothing points to that as a reality.

Here we are and no country on earth will do any deals with us and its that narrative i call out because it is based on nothing.

Again, last year, the EU was accused of breaking international law on migrants. It was news for about 48 hours and no one gave a fuck. Norway suffered similar.........nothing happened.

I understand political opponents of the government and brexit will jump all over this, i just don't agree with their end of the world profestations but then i haven't agreed with them for the lsat 5 years.

Sure a large part of the way this being debated and the repercussions considered is hyperbolic because that is now the level of political discourse. Everything is binary and the language is polemic.
There is a difference between breaking international law and breaking with an internationally ratified treaty that you negotiated, voted on and then got elected on the back of in the space of 12 months. Surely you can see that?

 

[mcfc1632]

Except that it isn't double-standards or hypocritical or, indeed, as binary as you would have it.

A trade deal with the US could be potentially damaging to areas such as health care and food standards so we need to be cautious and proceed mindful of the risks. We have to balance that with the undoubted fact that we have to strike trade deals to replace what we lose in leaving the EU. We are now being warned by senior figures in the US that the way we are behaving risks scuppering any such trade deal. If it pans out that way we no longer need to worry about the potential risks to the NHS but we do need to worry about the actual risk of having no trade deal, along with soured relations, with one of historically strongest allies.

That is not demeaning brexit it is making sure that the clowns running the country at the moment dont fuck that up along with everything else.

I agree with a lot here - and (although you may not think this) you seem to agree with a lot that I posted.

I was just confirming the truth of what the usual suspects that dominate the subforum have been posting - you are not one of those - and how they twist and squirm to present anything in a manner that can be seen as detrimental to Brexit.

I have often referred to Johnson as a clown/buffoon etc. I am no fan and neither is @Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese - but he is only around for a short while - the Brexit outcome will determine the UK's health for decades to come including when we have Labour governments leading us. Many Brexit supporters on this forum are traditionally Labour voters

So - I was just commenting in regard to the usual suspects that seek to control the narrative on all subforum threads

Bottom line is that we are in throes of establishing (or not) our agreement with the EU - we both agree that one with the US will be years away and subject to various examples of politicking - either down to Ireland or the level of support the US receives from the UK in some future global event etc.

So let's get on with the EU deal

 

[chedlee]

In the short term, the repercussion will be the vast majority make it abundantly clear they are a bunch of idiots who need to think again and roll back on this.

Long term? There won't be any. It will be chip paper in a few weeks time. It wont stop trade deals.

Possibly but the trade deals might be harder to come by and they might not be as beneficial to us as they might have been. Lot of 'mights' in that sentence. Just seems unnecessary to me, we have left the EU, it's going to be tough so why make it tougher?

 

[blueinsa]

Sure a large part of the way this being debated and the repercussions considered is hyperbolic because that is now the level of political discourse. Everything is binary and the language is polemic.
There is a difference between breaking international law and breaking with an internationally ratified treaty that you negotiated, voted on and then got elected on the back of in the space of 12 months. Surely you can see that?

I can see it. I've said i don't agree with it and it should be reversed.

I stand by my opinion though that even if they don't roll it back, it won't affect trade deals going forwards with anyone of note because money rules the world, not a Nancy Pelosi etc.

Agree completely with you on the hyperbole and polemic language.

 

[mcfc1632]

The whole notion that any country acts as a truly independent state is questionable, there are constraints placed on them all the time if they deal internationally. We signed up for this particular constraint in good faith and now we are acting in bad faith. That will have repercussions that some people think will matter more that other people do.

Again I am largely in agreement - but I refer you to my longer post a few pages back for how we got to the situation of having a WA so biased against the UK and therefore needing to consider extreme and unpalatable actions to prevent the inherent damage

 

[chedlee]

I agree with a lot here - and (although you may not think this) you seem to agree with a lot that I posted.

I was just confirming the truth of what the usual suspects that dominate the subforum have been posting - you are not one of those - and how they twist and squirm to present anything in a manner that can be seen as detrimental to Brexit.

I have often referred to Johnson as a clown/buffoon etc. I am no fan and neither is @Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese - but he is only around for a short while - the Brexit outcome will determine the UK's health for decades to come including when we have Labour governments leading us. Many Brexit supporters on this forum are traditionally Labour voters

So - I was just commenting in regard to the usual suspects that seek to control the narrative on all subforum threads

Bottom line is that we are in throes of establishing (or not) our agreement with the EU - we both agree that one with the US will be years away and subject to various examples of politicking - either down to Ireland or the level of support the US receives from the UK in some future global event etc.

So let's get on with the EU deal

Yes, I certainly don't want to get drawn into the politics of Bluemoon subforum threads or the personalities involved, but I am interested in discussing politics in general and, on here at least, the ramifications of leaving the EU.

Lets see what today brings.

 

[mcfc1632]

Possibly but the trade deals might be harder to come by and they might not be as beneficial to us as they might have been. Lot of 'mights' in that sentence. Just seems unnecessary to me, we have left the EU, it's going to be tough so why make it tougher?

I agree with all that and the last sentence entirely - to make it 'less tougher' we need to not be tied into EU controls over our domestic policies and be able to invest in the UK

The EU want these controls for reasons - and they have, understandably, their own interests and protection of the current balance of trade as the priority - not the well-being of an ex-member

 

[mcfc1632]

Yes, I certainly don't want to get drawn into the politics of Bluemoon subforum threads or the personalities involved, but I am interested in discussing politics in general and, on here at least, the ramifications of leaving the EU.

Lets see what today brings.

Agreed - please stick around the subforum and you will see much evidence of what I said - but let's not us get involved in that;-)

 

[bluejon]

@Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese gave you a sensible response to your good points raised - but I will add to it...

There needs to be recognition that the UK has now left the EU and if it is to be able to achieve success as an independent state it needs to be able to manage its own affairs and priorities.

Perpetual subservience to EU policy cannot be accepted - so LPF, ECJ arbitration and other such fundamental constraints must be non-starters.

The ability for the UK to determine its own policies and manage its own implementation of those policies has been badly undermined by the administrations of both Cameron and May.

Cameron's undermining of the UK was less serious because it was done pre-referendum and although he handed over negotiating leverage to the EU in his 'supposed negotiations' in the way he broadcast how bad leaving the EU would be and how he marshalled the POTUS, head of the IMF and a parade of other 'worthies' to try and defeat a Leave outcome - it did not undermine the 'future' of the UK in a post-Brexit world.

May's undermining of the UK - along with the actions of the EU's sycophants at Westminster has resulted in the potential for major and perpetual damage to the UK through tying the UK to the EU's controls - wrapped up in the WA that the EU/Robbins/May produced.

The UK needs to break free of the negotiating leverage that May has handed to the EU - and the potential for a US/UK trade deal at the moment is just part of that leverage.

We have had years of the EU callously making use of the Ireland/N.I. border issue - pulling Varadkar's strings - to leverage that issue to either prevent Brexit or gain more controls in the WA - they would have drank much champagne when May/Robbins fell for the obscenity that was the unfettered backstop. And during this time we had Pelosi and others over from the US to reaffirm their 'commitment to Ireland' and clearly state that a TA will not be agreed if.....

Much is made of the fact that Johnson signed off on May's WA - minus the unfettered backstop - but that WA was indeed the product of years of control by the EU over Robbins/May. Out of the blue - the clouds parted and Johnson was given a stonking majority and 5 years to use it.

I have always said that:

"We will not see movement from the EU unless and until they are faced with the prospect of a viable walk-away option – and the political will to use it”

And it has always been true - which is why some posters try to demean it.

I think that a decision was made to simply lose no more time in trying renegotiations with the EU - they love to string them out for years - and to exit the transition period with or without a deal end 2020 - and a deal could not include the EU having the ability to control and constrain the UK beyond transition. Hence the PD has been thankfully jettisoned and robust action is being signalled to prevent the 'veiled threat of machinations' by the EU to inappropriately exploit the protocol

What will be will be - the EU will either reach a deal with the UK on the basis of our red lines or not - but there is no point wasting more months and years sitting around a table which is what the EU wants to do - ideally until the next election

Johnson's government has 4 years to implement policies that deliver on his manifesto promises to level up in the Midlands and the North - that is how he will be judged in 2024 and the clock is ticking. None of those 4 years can be wasted in more deliberate delay with the EU - and by extension - what will be in the US will be - it looks like the Democrats will win so that would also be years wasted on negotiations on a TA with Ireland again being used as a gambit.

The Remainer focus is all on trade - yes it is important - but the UK needs significant and direct investment in the UK - investment that the EU will seek to stymie because it will impact the significant benefits they get from the current trading position with and their controls over the UK.

I still think a deal can/will be secured - because the EU very badly need one as well - but it must not include continued controls by the EU over the UK.

My mantra has always been correct - but if we end up with no-deal - then better sooner rather than later

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

 

[BobKowalski]

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

I always describe the Brexiteer arguments as ‘toddler tantrums’ so I guess if we can elevate it to ‘stroppy teenager’ we are making progress :)

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

Exactly and the only possible outcome is the hardest of brexits or no deal. And that was never sold to the public and would never have won a referendum. The leave campaign described the softest of brexits and everything else was project fear. Now all they will accept is the basis of project fear and dissenting voices are 'disrespecting the will of the people' and other such guff.

The whole thing is a massive dissaster. We are still looking to solve teh irish border problem 4 years on and with only months to go. The current solution is to just ignore the problem and the agreed solution exist. Time is nearly up on all this bollocks. Its do a deal or not in the next 4 months, a shit outcome either way and then we all live with the consequence.

 

[west didsblue]

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

I always stop reading when I see that poster’s name. You did well to get that far.

 

[mcfc1632]

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

Your prerogative, anyway - to make the arch-Remainers happy:

EU Reportedly Mulling Legal Action Against UK over Its Resolve to Rework Parts of Brexit Deal | Farsnews Agency

 

[Vic]

Again I am largely in agreement - but I refer you to my longer post a few pages back for how we got to the situation of having a WA so biased against the UK and therefore needing to consider extreme and unpalatable actions to prevent the inherent damage

Apparently voted for by the public. (A minority, but enough under a crap electoral system to deliver an unrepresentative majority of MPs).
But if democracy means anything, should not the election result mean the WA is sacrosanct and can't be changed without another election?

 

[Vic]

Your prerogative, anyway - to make the arch-Remainers happy:

EU Reportedly Mulling Legal Action Against UK over Its Resolve to Rework Parts of Brexit Deal | Farsnews Agency

Is that the EU going to the UK courts to get UK legislation ruled unlawful?

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I think a key thing that is forgotten here is that the EU was dealing with an EU member state when the WA was drawn up.Now it is not.

 

[Vic]

Somehow, I don't think too much attention was paid to these dire forecasts. More certainties are being bandied about now, nobody will want to deal with us, everyone's laughing, we're totally fucked, the usual stuff.
Let's wait until all these things, or even one of them, does happen.

It's happened. As from 1st January, do we actually have any definite deals with anyone?

 

[Saddleworth2]

Sorry, but i stopped reading after the highlighted bit. This whole concept that agreeing to what other people would like us to do in order so we have good relations with them is somehow subservience is the exact reason why the brexit argument does my tits in. It is not subservience, it is diplomacy, and if you tell everyone to "fuck off, we do things our way" they are likely to tell you the same in return and everything becomes a mess. That argument needs to grow the fuck up, it sounds like a stroppy teenager.

There is an element of LPF in every major trade deal. It’s quite normal.