How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

[lloydie]

Having watched a bizarre C4 programme the other night with Greg Wallace, leaving the EU has allowed this country to start producing meat originating from human tissue. People are paid to donate balls of flesh upto the size of an orange which are then used to grow meat for human consumption. Oh, and the best tasting meat comes from "oranges" donated by the under 7s. Well done to all of you who decided de-regulation was a good idea!!

Wanna buy a bridge?

 

[N1985]

That front page is a perfect example of how to rile and divide a nation. ‘Markled’, ‘EU’, bit of royalty thrown in and you get your readers frothing.

Who the fuck buys that shit?

Half this board by the looks of things

 

[bluethrunthru]

ha ha ha - serious paper reviews actually commented on this "news" ........... bastard EU taking back control - that was our idea

 

[BrianW]

I'm all for full political integration with the EU. For one thing, it would diminish the input of corrupt and incompetent British politicians, which can only be for the good. In time, we might even have adults running our affairs and improving our lives.

There is nothing magic about the political settlement of the UK as it is currently established. An unelected, bloated House of Lords full of corrupt grifters and a Lower House in which a clear majority can be elected by a minority of voters, and which then proceeds to act like an elected dictatorship. Things, as they say, can only get better.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

Having watched a bizarre C4 programme the other night with Greg Wallace, leaving the EU has allowed this country to start producing meat originating from human tissue. People are paid to donate balls of flesh upto the size of an orange which are then used to grow meat for human consumption. Oh, and the best tasting meat comes from "oranges" donated by the under 7s. Well done to all of you who decided de-regulation was a good idea!!

The fact it was a spoof has been all over the news ever since…

 

[Oldham Exile]

I'm sorry but you need to read up on EFTA. EFTA was formed off the back of countries like Norway and Switzerland rejecting EU membership. Norway just for example was in the EEC many years ago when it existed however Norwegians rejected joining what became the EU and so they formed EFTA with other countries.

EFTA is NOT managed by the EU, nothing is granted by the EU because EFTA has nothing to do with the EU. Countries like Norway rejected EU membership however the consequence of that was they had to find a medium to maintain trade within the EEA. EFTA trading arrangements are not managed or overseen by the EU, any EFTA country can sign trade deals independent of anyone else.

The only relationship that EFTA states have with the EU is through their negotiated participation within the EEA single market but the cost of that relationship is they have no say in the rules of that market and they have to accept freedom of movement. Some would say actually that there is a mutual advantage to freedom of movement but obviously some wouldn't.

Please remember that the EU does not contain all of Europe, the EU is just a political organisation that sits within the EEA. It is the EU and its political structure that I and many others are skeptical of. I voted remain for economic reasons but I would vote to leave the EU if it was possible to retain the economic benefits through a decent deal but that wasn't asked of us in the referendum. I am not interested in the EU, I am interested in trade with Europe and that's where we will suffer economically.

EFTA and Switzerland prove that it is possible to maintain some trading relationship and trade within the single market without having to be an EU member. The biggest problem of leave was that the final deal ensured we left the EEA and not just the EU. Nobody however ever voted to leave Europe, they voted to leave the political aspect of the EU.

Not a single leave voter voted to leave with any specific deal or none at all because that wasn't the question of the referendum. The mitigation of leave therefore came down to the politicians who had to negotiate it and in the end it's those politicians, the poisonous political climate and party politics that is to blame for how things ended up. The fact that even now Labour have no policy for making amends on the EU deal just proves it, they won't tackle this topic because they know they'd lose the election!

Icelandic foreign minister to UK: Please join EFTA

‘Everyone wants to sell you goods and services,’ minister says.

www.politico.eu

Another excellent post from you.

And one which again exposes several 'inconvenient truths' that the echo chamber prefers to ignore

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Half this board by the looks of things

Must be like buying a nasty version of the Beano.

 

[Postman Pep]

Another excellent post from you.

And one which again exposes several 'inconvenient truths' that the echo chamber prefers to ignore

Go on give us an unfettered backstop for old times sake ;)

 

[west didsblue]

Another excellent post from you.

And one which again exposes several 'inconvenient truths' that the echo chamber prefers to ignore

“Inconvenient truths”
Where have I heard that before?
I’d say we need a viable walk away option from Brexit and the political will to use it.

 

[inbetween]

Quoting what Iceland thought in 2017 is not much help. What do Norway and Switzerland think now about the UK joining EFTA?

Your last two paragraphs expose the main problem. Brexiters spoke with forked tongue as to what Brexit would look like. It really isn't an excuse for voting to leave in a referendum where the choice was between voting Remain for a known status quo (even with caveats about what "ever-closer union" might mean) and voting Leave where no-one, but no-one, knew what we'd end up with. That the negotiations then ended up in the hands of lying charlatans just reinforces that it was a bad choice.

Of course, what we never got was negotiators with the political will to get a better deal by threatening to leave with no deal. (For new readers, there are bloviating lurkers who pushed that.)

I have no idea and it's hard to say because it has never been talked about seriously. Prior to leaving I think it was mentioned and there are quotes from various random Norwegian politicians who were against it but who knows now? It was impossible to discuss it at the time because remainers only wanted to remain and Brexiteers just attacked compromise as remain under a different guise.

The critical error of Brexiteers was they argued that the UK was too tall and would just be given what it wants. Ultimately that was exposed in the negotiations but not because the UK wasn't tall but because the EU didn't care. The EU actually negotiated poorly, they protected the integrity of the single market and the political aspects of the EU but the populations of the EU member states are worse off for it. It was a big political win for the EU but not really for anyone else.

They just took advantage of the fact that it was a time limited process and we didn't have a coherent policy that could ever easily get through Parliament. It's quite easy to negotiate with someone who doesn't know what they want and can't stand their ground because of it. They wouldn't bend and we had to which in the end is what Boris did but only because he wasn't arsed and just wanted power at any cost.

May started with a slim majority and she then triggered Article 50 without any coherent Brexit policy, she then subsequently lost that majority. That sequence of events both in terms of the negotiations and where we have ended up has to be amongst the most stupid and disastrous things any politician has done in recent governmental history.