How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

inbetween said:
... The most critical failure of Brexit is not Brexit, it has been the consistent failure of the Tory Party to meet in the middle and to appraise all available options.
Click to expand...
Fixed.

Of course compromises were discussed. There were indicative votes in Parliament. Tory divisions meant none got a majority.
 
Brewster's millions said:
The compromise options never really existed for the UK though unfortunately, certainly in terms of EFTA or EEA membership, and this should really have been emphasised during the referendum debate. Had it been emphasised, then voters would probably have had a better understanding of where we would ultimately end up, which in my opinion was always going to be where we are currently, with a simple free trade agreement but without single market access and so on.

EFTA membership actually doesn’t relate to single market access, and EFTA is essentially a bit of a free trade relic now as it was essentially just a staging post for countries which ultimately went on to joining the EU outright. The UK would need to join the EEA if it wanted something close to full single market access, but again this is very unlikely as being an EEA member leaves you subject to new EU legislation, but without a vote on this legislation or any major influence on its formation. No large country would ever sign up to this situation, so this is really a non-starter.

Essentially, no existing organisation would suit the UK’s circumstances. The only real option for the UK is to try to come up with more bi-lateral agreements with the EU, but the EU presumably has little incentive to do this and the Northern Ireland protocol will be a constant distraction. So we are where we are, and again I think this really should have been emphasised during the referendum as it may have made the difference.
Click to expand...
Yes they did, the EU even suggested it to us as a solution to the Northern Ireland protocol but Teresa May thought she could 'negotiate' a better deal.

Yes it does, the EFTA has bilateral agreements in place with the EU that allows access to the single market, free movement of people but free from the political bloc elements the EU imposes on its members that were the primary causes of us wanting to leave it in the first place.

But the 'hard' brexiters didn't want it, they wanted full separation. Remainers didn't even bother entertaining the idea, they were too hard-lined to want to remain. Those seeking a compromise, the 'soft' brexit advocates, were lost in the discussion. Right now, rejoining the EFTA would be perfect and far outweighs the arguments to rejoin the EU as a full member.
 
Brewster's millions said:
The compromise options never really existed for the UK though unfortunately, certainly in terms of EFTA or EEA membership, and this should really have been emphasised during the referendum debate. Had it been emphasised, then voters would probably have had a better understanding of where we would ultimately end up, which in my opinion was always going to be where we are currently, with a simple free trade agreement but without single market access and so on.

EFTA membership actually doesn’t relate to single market access, and EFTA is essentially a bit of a free trade relic now as it was essentially just a staging post for countries which ultimately went on to joining the EU outright. The UK would need to join the EEA if it wanted something close to full single market access, but again this is very unlikely as being an EEA member leaves you subject to new EU legislation, but without a vote on this legislation or any major influence on its formation. No large country would ever sign up to this situation, so this is really a non-starter.

Essentially, no existing organisation would suit the UK’s circumstances. The only real option for the UK is to try to come up with more bi-lateral agreements with the EU, but the EU presumably has little incentive to do this and the Northern Ireland protocol will be a constant distraction. So we are where we are, and again I think this really should have been emphasised during the referendum as it may have made the difference.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it emphasised?

Remain: "Leaving would mean leaving the Customs Union and the Single Market"

Leave: "No-one is talking about leaving the Single Market." "We would still be in a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border." Even the bloviator admitted that was just a lie. Were people really stupid to not grasp what it meant, or just stupid enough to believe the Leave Lies ("enough of experts", "project fear", etc etc).
 
Metal Biker said:
Yes they did, the EU even suggested it to us as a solution to the Northern Ireland protocol but Teresa May thought she could 'negotiate' a better deal.

Yes it does, the EFTA has bilateral agreements in place with the EU that allows access to the single market, free movement of people but free from the political bloc elements the EU imposes on its members that were the primary causes of us wanting to leave it in the first place.

But the 'hard' brexiters didn't want it, they wanted full separation. Remainers didn't even bother entertaining the idea, they were too hard-lined to want to remain. Those seeking a compromise, the 'soft' brexit advocates, were lost in the discussion. Right now, rejoining the EFTA would be perfect and far outweighs the arguments to rejoin the EU as a full member.
Click to expand...
I'm not having that. Most people voting remain would have accepted a compromise, but May and the ERG came up with hard Brexit nonsense, and "No deal is better than a bad deal", threatened the GFA, and that just boosted the campaign for another referendum to do what the Irish had done earlier and realise what a daft thing they'd done. Brits are made of sterner stuff, and were prepared to stick to doing daft things.
 
If EFTA was a viable alternative, why did we leave it and join the European Economic Community in the first place?

Fantasy politics.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
If EFTA was a viable alternative, why did we leave it and join the European Economic Community in the first place?

Fantasy politics.
Click to expand...
It was always the most sensible solution as I was saying in 2016, it should have been an option to vote for rather than just vote leave.

I think if it wasn't for Maastricht we would have stayed in the EC and it wouldn't be up for debate.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.