What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
That sounds awfully like leaving without any agreement and seeking to then negotiate while trading on WTO terms.
But then, most of those who have talked of a "clean Brexit" really seem to want the hardest possible break with the EU (often allied to a desire for the to become a deregulated unilateral free trade Minfordesque "paradise"), regardless of the consequences.
I have a sneaking suspicion that that is unlikely to work well for a significant proportion of the population.
But I'm probably being deliberately obtuse.
As an aside, I am really not drooling over the clusterfuck that is the UK Government "policy" on Brexit.
Frankly, I'm absolutely terrified at the vista that I feel is opening before me, where the 1997 Blairite anthem that "Things can only get better" will prove just the teensiest bit false.
I remember bouncing up and down to that at half time at old trafford in our QF FA Cup defeat in 1994
Schmeichel had been sent off just before half time. Heddy days
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
That sounds awfully like leaving without any agreement and seeking to then negotiate while trading on WTO terms.
But then, most of those who have talked of a "clean Brexit" really seem to want the hardest possible break with the EU (often allied to a desire for the to become a deregulated unilateral free trade Minfordesque "paradise"), regardless of the consequences.
I have a sneaking suspicion that that is unlikely to work well for a significant proportion of the population.
But I'm probably being deliberately obtuse.
As an aside, I am really not drooling over the clusterfuck that is the UK Government "policy" on Brexit.
Frankly, I'm absolutely terrified at the vista that I feel is opening before me, where the 1997 Blairite anthem that "Things can only get better" will prove just the teensiest bit false.
I remember bouncing up and down to that at half time at old trafford in our QF FA Cup defeat in 1994
Schmeichel had been sent off just before half time. Heddy days
Lasted for about a minute after the second half started.
I take Chippys lols as an expression of glee at the pissed offness of us brexit losers. As far as I am concerned he can freely continue to express his glee in this brief way. I shall continue to express my pissed offness, but at greater length with more developed arguments.
It's pointless. As I said, he reacts that way to facts, putting more facts in front of any of them isn't going to help, they are too stupid to understand. I shall refrain from pointing this out from now on as it upsets them.
Don't waste your money though. Pair of twats. I've crossed swords with Halligan a couple of time on Twitter, and funny enough not re Brexit in either case. Likes to dish it out but has some difficulty taking it. It's fun to remind him how he predicted that the oil price would return to $100 by the summer. The summer of 2016...He's got a bit of a soft spot for Russia, you see...
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Ok.
The brexit referendum result was a starting point with no identifiable direction of travel. That is what I think you're saying.
The UK voted to leave, and if I may park the concept of negotiations, and I am aware some of the points below have been addressed, but I am reverting to the starting position for a moment, the starting point means (in no particular order, from memory and with omissions)
No participation in EU elections and governance. UK citizens in the EU losing their right to live and work there. EU citizens losing their right to live and work in the UK. No access to EU airspace. No access to the EU standards on medicines. No access to EU waters. Border checks on EU goods and people. Tariffs on EU goods. A hard border in Ireland. A hard border between Spain and Gibraltar. No more EHIC card. The end of cooperation and collaboration with EU agencies of all kind, but particularly in academia and research. The end of security cooperation. Restrictions on the UK financial services industry operating in the EU. No alignment standards with the EU on food quality and safety.
There is other stuff which doesn't presently spring to mind.
Now imagine what you describe as the starting point also being the finishing point...possibly a 'clean' brexit.
However you acknowledge that isn't what will happen because of something called 'negotiation'. I have tried to outline what you call the 'defined known starting point', and tellingly you talk about negotiations mitigating the pain all round caused by the brexit referendum result. But what happens in the negotiation and any way how is the UK getting on so far?
Here is where we may disagree. In the absence of knowing what they want it is the brexit negotiators who are creating the clusterfuck. Not the EU. If remainers drool over the clusterfuck it is merely one of many reactions to the clusterfuck brexit UK is presenting. Others don't drool but are bemused, some horrified.
For the millionth time, any clusterfuck is not caused by moaning minnies, not caused by people talking the country down, not caused by remainer losers like me, and not caused by the EU. Any clusterfuck is entirely down to the brexit voting majority.
Nothing done formally by the EU need surprise brexit UK, because the UK knew everything about EU rules positions and procedures by dint of having been a member for so long.
As far as I can tell 'negotiations ' should be about the UK asking for stuff, and the EU checking it's rule book to see if it can have it. If EU rules mean some internal damage to the EU because of brexit then the damage will be to 13% of their financial business, but for clusterfucking brexit UK it will be 42%.
If a 'clean' brexit means remaining at the starting point, nothing negotiated, and my list above becomes reality, then go for it. You won.
If it means negotiating something, then the UK method might better be described like Oliver asking if he might be granted an extra bowl of gruel.
Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
Nobody needs to wish for anything, but to simply have voted brexit.
Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
No one's wishing for this. This man is the head of the organisation responsible for the operation of our borders and tasked with implementing the collection of trade tariffs. He was giving evidence to a parliamentary committee from a position of experience, knowledge, data and expertise. Unlike some blowhard Brexiteer columnist regurgitating ignorance, myth and bias for their audience it is his job to know stuff like this. That's why he was there.
You are clearly too far gone along with the whole ideology of it all to stop and consider what the implications are if, even his conservative, position is correct but in a proper functioning government one would hope that someone with a modicum of integrity would do so and mitigate what is so evidently staring us all in the face.
Wishful thinking, willful ignorance and dismissing experts because you don't like what they are telling you is hardly doing your cause any good.
Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
Hasn't happened but will, the day we leave the customs union. If you read the pages above, there are many hits to our economy just from the vote to leave. Anyone but a Daily Mail headline writer must know we are headed for the cliff edge like lemmings, led by intellectuals like Boris and Rees-Mogg.
On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation of one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that, the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...
On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...
£20B a year? I briefly saw the number quoted yesterday and assumed it was the total cost of setting up the infrastructure required for max fac rather than the annual cost - I assume that must basically take it off the table.
That being said the whole concept of the Tories tearing themselves over whether to land on a Customs Partnership or max fac seems odd given that the EU is unlikely to agree to either.
On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...
£20B a year? I briefly saw the number quoted yesterday and assumed it was the total cost of setting up the infrastructure required for max fac rather than the annual cost - I assume that must basically take it off the table.
That being said the whole concept of the Tories tearing themselves over whether to land on a Customs Partnership or max fac seems odd given that the EU is unlikely to agree to either.
Yep. Costs to business (which will obviously be passed on) of between £17b - £20b annually.and would take years to implement.
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:
So the EU is telling brexit UK that the UK can no longer be a part of the EU wide Galileo satellite system because after brexit the UK will be a foreign entity. When each individual voted brexit, because they knew what they were voting for, they anticipated that this exclusion would happen, and had alternative fully costed plans. Now the UK is lodging a strong objection to the exclusion it clearly voted for. The UK says it contravenes the phase one withdrawal deal signed in December. This is interesting because in that same December deal the UK signed up to included a fall back Irish border resolution with a border in the Irish sea, effectively leaving Northern Ireland in the EU. So if the UK insists Galileo cooperation is to happen, it may well be insisting on a break up of its own United Kingdom on the same deal signing basis. Brexiters knew all this anyway when they voted so they have it all in hand.
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:
So a 'passionate remainer voter' is still a remainer-go figure. I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what? My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
Southbank. My defenition is of democracy is that people can make INFORMED choices. Do you truly believe that was the case with Brexit? Given that what we were offered is unliely to materialise, should democracy not mean a vote on the final deal which will differ greatly from the carrott promised?
So a 'passionate remainer voter' is still a remainer-go figure. I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what? My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
I would believe you care about democracy if it were not for one thing. The only thing the British public voted for was to leave the EU. There are different ways to leave the EU. There has been a lot of rubbish talked about what this meant when nobody can know. When somebody says, I didn't vote for some form of customs union, well they can only speak for themselves not everybody who voted. I know a few Brexiters and they have very different outlooks.
For those that are really interested in democracy, there are two interesting things. polls are showing in and outers are very close as they were in the vote. But there is a clear majority who seem to want to stay in the single market! I would say polls are the only way to gauge what the public's view is as the referendum didn't ask that question.
Surely the democratic solution is to let people vote on what is agreed and they we can all say it has public support. Sorry, but I don't understand how suggesting a public vote can be anything but democratic! Yes, we have had a vote, but there was absolutely no clarity on the detail. If people are so sure, as they claim to be, what people voted for, they ought to welcome a vote on the final agreement to shut all the moaning remainers up! Unless they are afraid of real democracy, which of course they are!
Without re-reading the 260 previous pages, I am sure someone posted that the official Leave website claimed to want to stay in the single market. Subsequently deleted by hardliners after they realised they could not cherry pick the bits of EU they liked. So Bojo, Gove WRM and co are hijacking democracy not actioning it.
So a 'passionate remainer voter' is still a remainer-go figure. I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what? My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
Yet again with the sanctimonious, "I'm more democratic than you!" bs..and yet again I'll ask again how you square this approach with your support of the Henry VIII measures? We're a reshuffle away from Rees-Mogg being in a position to make executive decisions on laws that impact on every single one of us after all.
When children in my family grow older and can see the mess that has been created by Brexit I want to be able to apologise, empathise with them and explain that none of it was done in my name.
What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.
Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:
Comments
Schmeichel had been sent off just before half time. Heddy days
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/the-van-driver-being-put-out-of-business-by-brexit/
Don't waste your money though. Pair of twats. I've crossed swords with Halligan a couple of time on Twitter, and funny enough not re Brexit in either case. Likes to dish it out but has some difficulty taking it. It's fun to remind him how he predicted that the oil price would return to $100 by the summer. The summer of 2016...He's got a bit of a soft spot for Russia, you see...
The brexit referendum result was a starting point with no identifiable direction of travel. That is what I think you're saying.
The UK voted to leave, and if I may park the concept of negotiations, and I am aware some of the points below have been addressed, but I am reverting to the starting position for a moment, the starting point means (in no particular order, from memory and with omissions)
No participation in EU elections and governance.
UK citizens in the EU losing their right to live and work there.
EU citizens losing their right to live and work in the UK.
No access to EU airspace.
No access to the EU standards on medicines.
No access to EU waters.
Border checks on EU goods and people.
Tariffs on EU goods.
A hard border in Ireland.
A hard border between Spain and Gibraltar.
No more EHIC card.
The end of cooperation and collaboration with EU agencies of all kind, but particularly in academia and research.
The end of security cooperation.
Restrictions on the UK financial services industry operating in the EU.
No alignment standards with the EU on food quality and safety.
There is other stuff which doesn't presently spring to mind.
Now imagine what you describe as the starting point also being the finishing point...possibly a 'clean' brexit.
However you acknowledge that isn't what will happen because of something called 'negotiation'. I have tried to outline what you call the 'defined known starting point', and tellingly you talk about negotiations mitigating the pain all round caused by the brexit referendum result. But what happens in the negotiation and any way how is the UK getting on so far?
Here is where we may disagree. In the absence of knowing what they want it is the brexit negotiators who are creating the clusterfuck. Not the EU. If remainers drool over the clusterfuck it is merely one of many reactions to the clusterfuck brexit UK is presenting. Others don't drool but are bemused, some horrified.
For the millionth time, any clusterfuck is not caused by moaning minnies, not caused by people talking the country down, not caused by remainer losers like me, and not caused by the EU. Any clusterfuck is entirely down to the brexit voting majority.
Nothing done formally by the EU need surprise brexit UK, because the UK knew everything about EU rules positions and procedures by dint of having been a member for so long.
As far as I can tell 'negotiations ' should be about the UK asking for stuff, and the EU checking it's rule book to see if it can have it.
If EU rules mean some internal damage to the EU because of brexit then the damage will be to 13% of their financial business, but for clusterfucking brexit UK it will be 42%.
If a 'clean' brexit means remaining at the starting point, nothing negotiated, and my list above becomes reality, then go for it. You won.
If it means negotiating something, then the UK method might better be described like Oliver asking if he might be granted an extra bowl of gruel.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-uk-eu-customs-model-cost-business-trade-hmrc-jon-thompson-max-fac-20-billion-a8365576.html
Still, blue passports, eh?
Or did you sell your business and start a hedge fund, without me knowing?
You are clearly too far gone along with the whole ideology of it all to stop and consider what the implications are if, even his conservative, position is correct but in a proper functioning government one would hope that someone with a modicum of integrity would do so and mitigate what is so evidently staring us all in the face.
Wishful thinking, willful ignorance and dismissing experts because you don't like what they are telling you is hardly doing your cause any good.
That being said the whole concept of the Tories tearing themselves over whether to land on a Customs Partnership or max fac seems odd given that the EU is unlikely to agree to either.
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44229606
I agree with you that should mean it's dead in the water but sadly I suspect it's not.
Now the UK is lodging a strong objection to the exclusion it clearly voted for.
The UK says it contravenes the phase one withdrawal deal signed in December.
This is interesting because in that same December deal the UK signed up to included a fall back Irish border resolution with a border in the Irish sea, effectively leaving Northern Ireland in the EU.
So if the UK insists Galileo cooperation is to happen, it may well be insisting on a break up of its own United Kingdom on the same deal signing basis.
Brexiters knew all this anyway when they voted so they have it all in hand.
I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what?
My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
For those that are really interested in democracy, there are two interesting things. polls are showing in and outers are very close as they were in the vote. But there is a clear majority who seem to want to stay in the single market! I would say polls are the only way to gauge what the public's view is as the referendum didn't ask that question.
Surely the democratic solution is to let people vote on what is agreed and they we can all say it has public support. Sorry, but I don't understand how suggesting a public vote can be anything but democratic! Yes, we have had a vote, but there was absolutely no clarity on the detail. If people are so sure, as they claim to be, what people voted for, they ought to welcome a vote on the final agreement to shut all the moaning remainers up! Unless they are afraid of real democracy, which of course they are!
When children in my family grow older and can see the mess that has been created by Brexit I want to be able to apologise, empathise with them and explain that none of it was done in my name.