Another new Brexit thread

[Ban-jani]

Because they voted in parlaiment to trigger article 50 and stated in their manifesto they would respect the result ?

So if they were such hardened remainers they should never have voted to trigger article 50 in which it gave the possibility of leaving with no deal

Who had it in their manifesto?

Do you mean Corbyn’s Labour, Corbyn who’s a leave supporter?

The fact of the matter is, people have decided what type of Brexit they want the wrong side of the referendum. Which means the rhetoric about free trade and a Norway style deal, the likes of Farage said, convinced many people that it was a good idea and now some people are choosing to decide they want a No Deal.

It’s not the majority that want No Deal though which is going to cause the issue.

Nothing now will be Brexit enough for some and you should have quit whilst you were ahead and they should have either taken the WA or Common Market 2.0.

 

[George Hannah]

It’s getting serious now . Boris comes charging in this week determined to leave come what May on the 31 October . He isn’t going to ask for an extension.

The legal position written in law is we leave on 31 / 10 with or without a deal. So any change to coming out then will need a change in law And the eu agreeing to it.

So I am still confused as to what is going to happen given it’s now summer Europe are on hols and the date is coming fast.

Everyone agrees we don’t want no deal.

Everyone hated the negotiated withdrawal agreement and in any event whilst it had a framework for leaving it does not as a matter of law have any legally binding deal about our future trade arrangement with the Eu in the future .that is my biggest issue with it

The Eu have repeatedly said that the existing agreement is it and they are not renegotiating it.

Boris is not going to withdraw article 50. No chance. May or hunt may have been persuaded but Boris no way.

Somebody have any idea what is going to happen as I am completely at a loss and I do think the coming of Boris does mean no deal is ever more likely .

My money's on a revocation by a "PM for a day" - probably Dominic Grieve.

 

[Ban-jani]

There was a journalist on the James O’Brien show yesterday that had gained access to the executive of the WTO. You know, the body that will bail us out when we crash out with no deal and rely on their agreements. Friends and fellow blues, would it surprise you to learn that the Director General of the WTO thinks we are absolutely off our trollies to even countenance such a move as it will ‘inevitably’ result in massive trade disruption and tariff increases which in some cases will make businesses non viable. The Agriculture sector was called out as one of the worst affected. So this isn’t the EU saying this, it’s the WTO.

What I found particularly depressing/non surprising was that other than this one journalist they (the wto) said there had been zero dialogue with U.K. mainstream media (or politicians that claimed a nodeal/wto solution was the way to go). Wouldn’t you think the likes of the BBC would want to out the facts around Johnson’s claims? Maybe he should write it on the side of a bus.

We haven’t just lost our marbles, we’re now smearing shit on the walls and have our underpants on our heads.

 

[Saddleworth2]

I heard that interview. It was alarming.

Agree mate. It shows how far the media have moved in the last few years.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

We haven’t just lost our marbles, we’re now smearing shit on the walls and have our underpants on our heads.

But here is a question for you.

If the guy from the WTO came on and said no country in the world operates under WTO rules, what does the WTO actually do? Nobody seems to like it’s rules.

 

[Ban-jani]

Nor plenty of remain MP's either.

Its very important to keep reminding people of this fact.

Why would they vote to leave?

If leave MP’s and voters actually backed Brexit, we’d be out by now or well on our way to be.

 

[Ban-jani]

But here is a question for you.

If the guy from the WTO came on and said no country in the world operates under WTO rules, what does the WTO actually do? Nobody seems to like it’s rules.

Nobody solely operates under its rules. Most countries still do in some capacity.

It’s the starting point before you agree a trade deal. It’s not designed to be all you do.

We’ve been warned and warned and warned about going onto WTO with everyone and the consequences, but people still have their fingers in their ears.

 

[blueinsa]

Why would they vote to leave?

Why would they vote for a referendum?

Why would they vote for the question on it?

Why would they then vote to trigger article 50?

 

[lancs blue]

But here is a question for you.

If the guy from the WTO came on and said no country in the world operates under WTO rules, what does the WTO actually do? Nobody seems to like it’s rules.

The WTO's main purpose is to encourage and facilitate trade agreements between its members, as part of that the members agree to abide by the regulations of the WTO which actively discourage countries from trading under "WTO rules" which are just a default setting if no agreements have been reached.

 

[Ban-jani]

Why would they vote for a referendum?

Why would they vote for the question on it?

Why would they then vote to trigger article 50?

Who voted for a referendum?

Who voted for the question?

Who voted to trigger A50?

 

[Saddleworth2]

We haven’t just lost our marbles, we’re now smearing shit on the walls and have our underpants on our heads.

With two pencils inserted in our nostrils shouting wibble at the wall. What a surprise Iran are taking us on in the gulf. As a nation, we are demonstrating just how dysfunctional we are to the rest of the world. But once we start renegotiating trade agreements everything will be different.

 

[blueinsa]

Who voted for a referendum?

Who voted for the question?

Who voted to trigger A50?

Parliament did.

Plenty of remain MP's did.

498 to 114.

Even Soubry voted to trigger it.

Why?

Keep blaming leave voters and leave MP's all you like but at some point you will have to look closer to home as well for the reasons we are where we are today.

 

[Ban-jani]

Parliament did.

Plenty of remain MP's did.

498 to 114.

Even Soubry voted to trigger it.

Why?

Keep blaming leave voters and leave MP's all you like but at some point you will have to look closer to home as well for the reasons we are where we are today.

Are you acknowledging we’re in a shit position?

Plenty of remain MP’s did what?

This isn’t the fault of Leave voters en masse, it’s the fault of those who aren’t accepting anything other than the hardest form of Brexit, a minority of Leave voters, which is forcing the likes of Johnson to try to appease them, both within his party and the electorate. Johnson and Hunt are both at fault for the appeasement, to gain power at any cost.

It’s also the fault of certain MP’s who are pushing for a hard Brexit and didn’t accept a more reasonable Brexit when it was there on a plate for them. Sure, I’ll happily blame some remain MP’s for it too...

But don’t you bloody dare suggest Remain voters are at fault for any of this shit. We knew the risks and weren’t willing to take them.

 

[Blue Hefner]

There was a journalist on the James O’Brien show yesterday that had gained access to the executive of the WTO. You know, the body that will bail us out when we crash out with no deal and rely on their agreements. Friends and fellow blues, would it surprise you to learn that the Director General of the WTO thinks we are absolutely off our trollies to even countenance such a move as it will ‘inevitably’ result in massive trade disruption and tariff increases which in some cases will make businesses non viable. The Agriculture sector was called out as one of the worst affected. So this isn’t the EU saying this, it’s the WTO.

What I found particularly depressing/non surprising was that other than this one journalist they (the wto) said there had been zero dialogue with U.K. mainstream media (or politicians that claimed a nodeal/wto solution was the way to go). Wouldn’t you think the likes of the BBC would want to out the facts around Johnson’s claims? Maybe he should write it on the side of a bus.

Yes and no. Yes, 3 years ago when the debate was relatively new. Bit not now, it would be a waste of time and effort and all that would happen is prominent MPs who are Brexit supporting and anti-BBC will say it is another example of the BBC bias - it wouldn't get through to people. It's too late

For example. I was just listening to a pod-cast with Rory Stewart and he was talking about is conversation with a farmer who is convinced a no-deal will be fine. When he explained what tariffs were(the farmer didn't really know) he still thought it would be alright. Another thing from the podcast which was interesting was that 2 people can say the same thing but it be interpreted/presented differently. E.g A non-no-deal MP could say that a no-deal will damage/end the farming and automotive industry ad they are branded scaremongers. A pro-Brexit economist can say those industries will be run down like the coal industry and we turn around and say it's the market, it will even itself out and these people can be trained

The issue now is who gets blamed when there is a no-deal or no Brexit. I think people will point the finger at the EU and therefore be more anti-EU in there stance and the hard-Tories/Brexit Party will become more prominent. Some think the Tory Party will get the blame and Corbyn will be PM, I'm not sure about that at all

 

[cibaman]

Not to mention the near 300 nautical mile sea crossing between Rosslare and Cherbourg which is the shortest crossing i think?

They then make their way to Belfast to face yet another sea crossing to Scotland to make mainland UK?

Nah im not having it.

But why do they risk life and limb trying to cross from France to the UK?

 

[Saddleworth2]

Yes and no. Yes, 3 years ago when the debate was relatively new. Bit not now, it would be a waste of time and effort and all that would happen is prominent MPs who are Brexit supporting and anti-BBC will say it is another example of the BBC bias - it wouldn't get through to people. It's too late

For example. I was just listening to a pod-cast with Rory Stewart and he was talking about is conversation with a farmer who is convinced a no-deal will be fine. When he explained what tariffs were(the farmer didn't really know) he still thought it would be alright. Another thing from the podcast which was interesting was that 2 people can say the same thing but it be interpreted/presented differently. E.g A non-no-deal MP could say that a no-deal will damage/end the farming and automotive industry ad they are branded scaremongers. A pro-Brexit economist can say those industries will be run down like the coal industry and we turn around and say it's the market, it will even itself out and these people can be trained

The issue now is who gets blamed when there is a no-deal or no Brexit. I think people will point the finger at the EU and therefore be more anti-EU in there stance and the hard-Tories/Brexit Party will become more prominent. Some think the Tory Party will get the blame and Corbyn will be PM, I'm not sure about that at all

My question was rhetorical as the BBC have been right wing biased since call me Dave stuffed the board and exec full of his cronies. Their policy of balance means to them that even where you have facts. Real facts, they will balance them by giving identical airtime to some loony shouting a contrary view. It has been left to freelance journalists like Carol Catwallader to investigate and out some of the most important stories. When she has, she has been attacked and vilified by mainstream media. Getting political facts from media in the UK is getting increasingly difficult. No wonder half the population have some strange bloody views.

Oh, and you are right. Once a no deal Brexit causes carnage to our businesses, the EU and Remainers will be blamed. Anybody other than those that caused the carnage.

 

[blueinsa]

But don’t you bloody dare suggest Remain voters are at fault for any of this shit. We knew the risks and weren’t willing to take them.

I didn't do that did I but by all means express some faux outrage over it lol.

We are in a shit position because parliament, both remain and leave have put us in this position.

They dont want brexit or even the possibility of it then dont vote for the ref, dont vote for the question on it and dont promise to respect the result.

They did just that and then they voted to trigger A50 only to then start rejecting brexit.

Parliament is full of fucking weasels, responsible for this mess and they can get us out of it.

 

[Blue Hefner]

My question was rhetorical as the BBC have been right wing biased since call me Dave stuffed the board and exec full of his cronies. Their policy of balance means to them that even where you have facts. Real facts, they will balance them by giving identical airtime to some loony shouting a contrary view. It has been left to freelance journalists like Carol Catwallader to investigate and out some of the most important stories. When she has, she has been attacked and vilified by mainstream media. Getting political facts from media in the UK is getting increasingly difficult. No wonder half the population have some strange bloody views.

I agree, in the main. One clip from NewsNight which highlights their 'balance' was when they had the Director of the WTO on and to balance that they had Andrea Leadsom - Sometimes, there are no two sides of the story. Sometimes, things are a matter of fact - but again, it's too late

 

[blueinsa]

But why do they risk life and limb trying to cross from France to the UK?

What has that question got to do with what i stated or even brexit?

I answered a post claiming that traffickers will see an opening and go via Ireland as its seen as an easy way into the UK.

Its very patently not an easy way in compared to a dash across the channel which will remain the default route for traffickers.

 

[cibaman]

But here is a question for you.

If the guy from the WTO came on and said no country in the world operates under WTO rules, what does the WTO actually do? Nobody seems to like it’s rules.

Isn't it just a fallback for when trade negotiations fail? No country wants it as their preferred option, but if they can't get what they want then WTO is the alternative. Its quite peverse to actually want WTO rules to apply.