How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

Saxmundham Blue said:
It's been an absolute disaster.

Anyone who voted in the 1973 referendum shouldn't have been eligible to vote in 2016.

The younger generation will have us back in the EU within a few years
Click to expand...
Such a terrible decision. The EU was far from perfect, but our system was already palpably broken. Now it is crushed.
 
No. And I’m glad I’m still getting jobs as a translator because I worried Brexit would put me out of a job, but then speaking a language used in Africa and Canada helps.
 
Had to leave the EU and all its meddlesome rules and regulations so that the country could become the world centre for cryptocurrency, but that will involve creating strict rules and regulations for a market that exists outside of rules and regulations and deliberately shuns them. Go figure.
 
Saxmundham Blue said:
It's been an absolute disaster.

Anyone who voted in the 1973 referendum shouldn't have been eligible to vote in 2016.

The younger generation will have us back in the EU within a few years
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I agree with arbitrary removal of voting rights because the folk concerned won't vote for the outcome you like - it's just a little bit Hitler-ish for me.
I do agree we'll be back in in a few years though in some form.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It’s easy to ascribe all the nation’s woes to Brexit, but the flaws go far, far deeper than that. It was only being in the EU that disguised that. Which tbf sort of ascribes all the nation’s woes to Brexit!
Click to expand...
I have seen inflation and high interest rates ascribed to Brexit. A cursory glance at EU Figures disproves that notion. Similarly high energy prices are nothing to do with Brexit. There was a post somewhere on BM recently that said our cutting off of EU energy arrangements was to blame. Our energy relationship with the EU remains unchanged, tho’ there are leisurely discussions about a new regime some years hence.
Similarly, the cluster fuck in N.I. has been ascribed to Brexit yet Varadkar and the EU have reportedly accepted all the main points that the UK was making i.e. Green and Red channels for UK exports to N.I., the removal of the EU commission’s right to apply to the court to amend UK regs. etc etc.
There are of course downsides to Brexit but it is important to identify them correctly in order to take the best remedial action. Contrary to the post above, there is no going back, we are stuck with it and we should plan accordingly.
Edit PS. The IMF forecast that UK will do worse than Russia this year has similarly been ascribed to Brexit but the IMF put it down to fiscal consolidation, absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. The way some media have reacted to this, you wouldn’t know that the forecast is an improvement on the previous one or that the IMF have said the consolidation policies are the correct ones.
 
Last edited:
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I'm not sure I agree with arbitrary removal of voting rights because the folk concerned won't vote for the outcome you like - it's just a little bit Hitler-ish for me.
I do agree we'll be back in in a few years though in some form.
Click to expand...
We should have used the EFTA route (similar to Norway) once the decision was taken to leave. That may be the future outcome.
 
KS55 said:
We should have used the EFTA route (similar to Norway) once the decision was taken to leave. That may be the future outcome.
Click to expand...
I think you are right, the problem was the 'debate' was so polarised and spiteful and the potential outcomes became likewise. Everyone in our parliament was claiming they were after a reasonable deal, but I believe it came down to one side trying to get the hardest brexit possible, and the other being duplicitous and seeking to stop it altogether. May probably did her best to get a decent compromise, but fell foul of the old adage about trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one. Boris jumped in stuck his fat finger in the wind and guessed he could 'get it done' etc.
I do recall options like EFTA being on the table in 2016, but in the end I think the EU understandably got the hump.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I think you are right, the problem was the 'debate' was so polarised and spiteful and the potential outcomes became likewise. Everyone in our parliament was claiming they were after a reasonable deal, but I believe it came down to one side trying to get the hardest brexit possible, and the other being duplicitous and seeking to stop it altogether. May probably did her best to get a decent compromise, but fell foul of the old adage about trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one. Boris jumped in stuck his fat finger in the wind and guessed he could 'get it done' etc.
I do recall options like EFTA being on the table in 2016, but in the end I think the EU understandably got the hump.
Click to expand...
How many would take EFTA membership today, I ask myself.

Could have sorted this six years ago but reasoned debate was never on the cards, just vitriolic verbiage.
 
Metal Biker said:
How many would take EFTA membership today, I ask myself.

Could have sorted this six years ago but reasoned debate was never on the cards, just vitriolic verbiage.
Click to expand...
And that vitriol continues to this day: brexiteers being characterised as stupid, old, racist etc. A poster on this thread suggesting that people who voted for brexit should be
disenfranchised. On the other side, Brexiteers in the Tory party are plotting against the PM and attacking the Chancellor, demanding tax cuts. You wouldn’t know that the Chancellor has set up a team to identify areas where EU rules are holding back development of certain industries and to plan regulatory changes. Additionally of course remainers ascribing every ill to Brexit in a far fetched manner. It really is time for a more calm and sensible approach.
 
So it's still the alternative history fantasy land of EFTA people hope for.

Gosh, do you think maybe it was never a viable alternative?
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I think you are right, the problem was the 'debate' was so polarised and spiteful and the potential outcomes became likewise. Everyone in our parliament was claiming they were after a reasonable deal, but I believe it came down to one side trying to get the hardest brexit possible, and the other being duplicitous and seeking to stop it altogether. May probably did her best to get a decent compromise, but fell foul of the old adage about trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one. Boris jumped in stuck his fat finger in the wind and guessed he could 'get it done' etc.
I do recall options like EFTA being on the table in 2016, but in the end I think the EU understandably got the hump.
Click to expand...
Was May really trying to please everyone? I seem to remember the discussion at the time was about how she was most invested in pleasing the Tory party, so had to find a deal that could pass parliament with all (or at least, most members of all the main factions) of the parliamentary Tory party. Maybe if she had gone for a "softer" Brexit (staying in the customs union, etc) it could have passed with a cross-party vote as a compromise position. But just like for her predecessor Cameron, the most important thing was always keeping the Tory party together and keeping it in power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top