How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

carlosthejackal said:
It’s as if he didn’t know what he was voting for
View attachment 113666
Click to expand...
The problem is - as this fellow knows - that unless you have a special agreement (e.g. membership of the EU) you have to treat all imports alike under WTO rules. If we carried on just letting EU stuff come in unchecked and without tariff, other WTO members could demand the same, and sue us.

A good example of how 'sovereignty' is a chimaera, unless you literally abandon every treaty and obligation and become North Korea 2.0. As we cannot feed ourselves, that is not an option.
 
BrianW said:
The problem is - as this fellow knows - that unless you have a special agreement (e.g. membership of the EU) you have to treat all imports alike under WTO rules. If we carried on just letting EU stuff come in unchecked and without tariff, other WTO members could demand the same, and sue us.

A good example of how 'sovereignty' is a chimaera, unless you literally abandon every treaty and obligation and become North Korea 2.0. As we cannot feed ourselves, that is not an option.
Click to expand...
Does he know it? That would mean he was fundamentally dishonest in supporting Brexit.

Surely not with his Victorian values.
 
bluethrunthru said:
what stands out in this?

www.bbc.co.uk

EU approves major overhaul of migration rules

The new rules are designed to make EU states share responsibility for hosting asylum seekers.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
This should have happened years ago. For years it's been a race to the bottom of countries turning a blind eye to asylum seekers going through their territory, and making the process as harsh as possible, as they hope they pass through and claim somewhere else instead. Meanwhile the likes of Italy and Greece get swamped and have to deal with the cost alone, and the likes of Germany, Sweden and Austria ultimately end up with far more asylum seekers than anyone else. A central fund that pays for asylum seekers wherever they are gets rid of this incentive to not deal with them fairly.

Personally, I'd go one further and have a quota system, where they are processed in the frontline countries, but are then assigned to a country. Obviously asylum seekers should be able to specify a preference (and if they have family already in a country, that could be taken into account), but ultimately, if you're genuinely fleeing persecution, you shouldn't be allowed to be too fussy about ending up in Slovakia instead of Sweden. But yeah, the chances of getting countries that currently take fuck all to agree to that are pretty small.
 
Vic said:
Does he know it? That would mean he was fundamentally dishonest in supporting Brexit.

Surely not with his Victorian values.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure he was dishonest, in the criminal sense at least. Intellectually dishonest, possibly, engaging in doublethink, definitely. There is a distinction from knowing that red tape was inevitably going to increase as an operation of common sense and saying the opposite - and fooling yourself around the subject.

The problem is that Brexit was a religion to this man and many of his acolytes, which meant they were incapable of rational, objective and reasoned thought on the subject. They believed what they wanted to believe. Their faith in the project made them blind to logic and rationality.

He’s still doing it now. Convinced it doesn’t have to be this way, when it was always going to be this way. There is no point trying to reason with a fanatic. They are incapable of being reasoned with.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
This should have happened years ago. For years it's been a race to the bottom of countries turning a blind eye to asylum seekers going through their territory, and making the process as harsh as possible, as they hope they pass through and claim somewhere else instead. Meanwhile the likes of Italy and Greece get swamped and have to deal with the cost alone, and the likes of Germany, Sweden and Austria ultimately end up with far more asylum seekers than anyone else. A central fund that pays for asylum seekers wherever they are gets rid of this incentive to not deal with them fairly.

Personally, I'd go one further and have a quota system, where they are processed in the frontline countries, but are then assigned to a country. Obviously asylum seekers should be able to specify a preference (and if they have family already in a country, that could be taken into account), but ultimately, if you're genuinely fleeing persecution, you shouldn't be allowed to be too fussy about ending up in Slovakia instead of Sweden. But yeah, the chances of getting countries that currently take fuck all to agree to that are pretty small.
Click to expand...

well you are correct in what you say and already Hungary has said it wants nowt to do with this but the point I was making really is that 27 countries are discussing/deciding on migration. We no longer have any part in the negotiations which is why we can't expect any of them to accept anyone we want to deport there.

This function was brought to you courtesy of Brexit.
 
bluethrunthru said:
well you are correct in what you say and already Hungary has said it wants nowt to do with this but the point I was making really is that 27 countries are discussing/deciding on migration. We no longer have any part in the negotiations which is why we can't expect any of them to accept anyone we want to deport there.
Click to expand...
And yet the Express and Mail will endlessly rant about this natural consequence of our uncoupling.
 
Postman Pep said:
Not long now ...

www.theguardian.com

Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UK

Labour also turns down European Commission’s proposal, which would have allowed young Britons to live, study and work in EU
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

The EU wants the mobility scheme. The UK will at some point do a mobility scheme, because it has a shopping list of things it wants/needs from the EU and the price will include a mobility scheme.

In other news, the Govt has again postponed the Brexit border controls because it is politically unpalatable and beyond our capacity to implement. Which kind of sums up why the UK has a shopping list of things it wants/needs from the EU.

It is funny though, that offering the young people of the UK greater freedom to travel is seen as impossible. And by funny I mean pathetic.
 
20 years from now and we will have stealthed our way back into EU so much that they will say lets just rejoin again. And all the stupid fuckers who voted for it to happen in the first place will just forget they were ever hoodwinked.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
20 years from now and we will have stealthed our way back into EU so much that they will say lets just rejoin again. And all the stupid fuckers who voted for it to happen in the first place will just forget they were ever hoodwinked.
Click to expand...

There is no way to return to the old arrangement the UK had with the EU i wager, it wont be of the nature of "we like this and that but we wanna opt out of these". Its going to be full package i bet or nothing, especially since i doubt the Eu is waiting for UK membership after all that hassle.
 
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