From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
The transition period that Britain will need can only be granted by a vote from the 27 members of the EU and it just takes one to veto it. A prolonged state of flux is not in the Republic of Ireland's interests
Cancel Brexit because we can't control a border ? Move the border into the sea and treat the island as an island ? Stay in the customs union in case someone opens fire at a customs post?
It's unfortunate as you said, that the GFA is breaking down for other reasons, but do the people of NI or ROI really want a return to violence over this? There are probably factions that do, but these guys will resort to violence with any excuse. Should we appease them ?
This issue has to be dealt with in as practical way as possible (probably no plan will be deemed ideal for all parties involved) - but we can't make it a deal breaker, we have to get on with it.
Apologies about this, still no internet at home, so this is tea break wittering...
The one thing that I'd quite like the UK Government to do is to be honest with people (in the UK and outside).
I'd like a practical resolution, but nothing, in terms of trade, that has been put forward by the Government is practical and realistic.
Despite what has been stated by May, Davis and others, it is logically impossible to assume that the UK can have the current arrangements at the border without retaining the current relationship.
It does not help that the current Government is beholden to the DUP (virtually the only pro-Brexit politicians in Northern Ireland), so that it looks much more likely that we will see Vince Clarke's Assembly than the Stormont Assembly reformed any time soon. A fundamental requirement of the Good Friday Agreement is that the UK Government is neutral regarding much of the political disputes in Northern Ireland. While the supremely ineffective James Brokenshire is doing his best to ensure that no-one pays any attention to what the Government says, I do not believe that the current position is such that would encourage members of Sinn Fein to view T May as an honest broker (notwithstanding the fact that, by their abstentionist policies, they are, just as much as the DUP, providing an increased majority for the Conservatives).
For what it is worth, I think that the personalities at the top of DUP/Sinn Fein make ongoing tension likely in any event (and for this I do blame the DUP more, despite how much I despise Sinn Fein) - but the Brexit vote, and its aftermath have made the situation much, much more fraught.
Regarding the possibility for violence, it will be increased, if for no other reason than that the terrorists (like them all) love social and economic despair in the young. If their opportunities are limited, for whatever reason, they prove fertile recruiting ground for extremists. The economy in Northern Ireland is fragile (or to use the technical term, shite) at the best of times - anything (such as barriers to trade - either with the rest of the EU or the rest of the UK) that makes things more difficult, will have a very significant impact.
And finally (as Cyril Fletcher might have been inclined to say - for those of us of a certain age) the problem is that the UK has form in terms of appeasing those believed to be likely to "resort to violence": a cynic might even say that that is how we got to where we are now (I'd take a look at the history behind the creation of Northern Ireland).
In an EU context REMAIN means status quo ie steady progress to 'ever closer union' as outlined by Juncker last week.
LEAVE, as evidenced by the shambles of negotiations, can happen in a number of ways.
Many on the LEAVE side are as fed up with the ineptness of May, Davis et al as any REMAINER.
My personal view is that, as closet remainers, they actively want to screw it up so that we later return to the EU and abolish the pound as a giant leap to further integration.
In an EU context REMAIN means status quo ie steady progress to 'ever closer union' as outlined by Juncker last week.
LEAVE, as evidenced by the shambles of negotiations, can happen in a number of ways.
Many on the LEAVE side are as fed up with the ineptness of May, Davis et al as any REMAINER.
My personal view is that, as closet remainers, they actively want to screw it up so that we later return to the EU and abolish the pound as a giant leap to further integration.
I fear you give them too much credit for having any kind of plan Len, I really don't think that they are competent enough even to think about screwing it up (although they are making a good go of it). Hasn't Davis always been a leaver though?
Cancel Brexit because we can't control a border ? Move the border into the sea and treat the island as an island ? Stay in the customs union in case someone opens fire at a customs post?
It's unfortunate as you said, that the GFA is breaking down for other reasons, but do the people of NI or ROI really want a return to violence over this? There are probably factions that do, but these guys will resort to violence with any excuse. Should we appease them ?
This issue has to be dealt with in as practical way as possible (probably no plan will be deemed ideal for all parties involved) - but we can't make it a deal breaker, we have to get on with it.
You ask 'so what shall we do?'. All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one. The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? After all we have to get on with it. Any ideas yourself?
you're wrong. I voted leave and I don't know the answer. There will be a solution, it won't derail our leaving the European Union.
And that, my friends, is why there should never have been a referendum in the first place...
Normally I'd agree, but in this instance I will be eternally grateful
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
Cancel Brexit because we can't control a border ? Move the border into the sea and treat the island as an island ? Stay in the customs union in case someone opens fire at a customs post?
It's unfortunate as you said, that the GFA is breaking down for other reasons, but do the people of NI or ROI really want a return to violence over this? There are probably factions that do, but these guys will resort to violence with any excuse. Should we appease them ?
This issue has to be dealt with in as practical way as possible (probably no plan will be deemed ideal for all parties involved) - but we can't make it a deal breaker, we have to get on with it.
You ask 'so what shall we do?'. All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one. The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? After all we have to get on with it. Any ideas yourself?
All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one - No, they voted on the principle and not the finite detail.
The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? Yes, they are in charge for now.
Any ideas yourself? - No, I work everyday to pay 650 folk to come up with the complex solutions that arise as a result of a majority General Election vote. Things like Universal Credit, NHS funding, Overseas Aid, Quantitative Easing etc are all too complex for an ordinary voter like me to to offer solutions for the elected Government - so I pay them to do it for me.
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The perceived 'Remainers' upper hand often comprised denigrating 'Leaver' sources as a response to points made rather than engaging in the issues or branding advocates of the 'Leave' case racist, uneducated and other personal slurs.
Not all posters adopted that stance I should add.
The one thing I'll single out from the 'Remain' campaign generally was the repeated meme that to stay in the EEA we had to stay in the EU. In other words the two were quite deliberately incorrectly conflated as a scare tactic even though factually incorrect.
When the unexpected 'Leave' result was declared there was a complete about turn and the 'soft' Brexit meme evolved. Guess what? the main plank of this is to remain within the EEA!
As I've often said, as one who voted 'Leave,' I think the 'Leave' negotiators are inept in the extreme and I favour joining EFTA in the short to medium term.
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The Remain campaign started at a massive disadvantage anyway: it had to undo 30 years of negative headlines and propaganda published in every form of media that had poisoned any possible debate regarding the merits of our EU membership. From unemployment to security, every possible issue that plagued ordinary voters was given a convenient scapegoat that no one dared to defend - the EU. Despite the fact that 99% of the issues that people have with the EU have actually nothing to do with our EU membership and more likely stem from Thatcherism and our incredibly poor application of neo-liberalism that had led to a patrician form of capitalism where the power and wealth is increasingly concentrated into an elite class.
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The Remain campaign started at a massive disadvantage anyway: it had to undo 30 years of negative headlines and propaganda published in every form of media that had poisoned any possible debate regarding the merits of our EU membership. From unemployment to security, every possible issue that plagued ordinary voters was given a convenient scapegoat that no one dared to defend - the EU. Despite the fact that 99% of the issues that people have with the EU have actually nothing to do with our EU membership and more likely stem from Thatcherism and our incredibly poor application of neo-liberalism that had led to a patrician form of capitalism where the power and wealth is increasingly concentrated into an elite class.
At the risk of going all Daphne... well said Fiiish.
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The perceived 'Remainers' upper hand often comprised denigrating 'Leaver' sources as a response to points made rather than engaging in the issues or branding advocates of the 'Leave' case racist, uneducated and other personal slurs.
Not all posters adopted that stance I should add.
The one thing I'll single out from the 'Remain' campaign generally was the repeated meme that to stay in the EEA we had to stay in the EU. In other words the two were quite deliberately incorrectly conflated as a scare tactic even though factually incorrect.
When the unexpected 'Leave' result was declared there was a complete about turn and the 'soft' Brexit meme evolved. Guess what? the main plank of this is to remain within the EEA!
As I've often said, as one who voted 'Leave,' I think the 'Leave' negotiators are inept in the extreme and I favour joining EFTA in the short to medium term.
Cancel Brexit because we can't control a border ? Move the border into the sea and treat the island as an island ? Stay in the customs union in case someone opens fire at a customs post?
It's unfortunate as you said, that the GFA is breaking down for other reasons, but do the people of NI or ROI really want a return to violence over this? There are probably factions that do, but these guys will resort to violence with any excuse. Should we appease them ?
This issue has to be dealt with in as practical way as possible (probably no plan will be deemed ideal for all parties involved) - but we can't make it a deal breaker, we have to get on with it.
You ask 'so what shall we do?'. All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one. The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? After all we have to get on with it. Any ideas yourself?
All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one - No, they voted on the principle and not the finite detail.
The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? Yes, they are in charge for now.
Any ideas yourself? - No, I work everyday to pay 650 folk to come up with the complex solutions that arise as a result of a majority General Election vote. Things like Universal Credit, NHS funding, Overseas Aid, Quantitative Easing etc are all too complex for an ordinary voter like me to to offer solutions for the elected Government - so I pay them to do it for me.
There are some contradictions there, Phil.
I absolutely agree that we live in a representative democracy and my representative (albeit I didn't vote for her) is supposed to represent me and the system means that the electorate put their faith in their MP representing their best interests. One of the reasons why referendums should not have a place in that representative democracy - but hey ho that's another story!!
Nobody voted for the the Government (executive) - they are self-appointed by the leader of the party with the most votes. I didn't vote for David Davies or Liam Fox to represent me in the negotiations, or for a buffoon to represent our foreign policy.
If laws are to be passed then Parliament should decide, not the Government without recourse to Parliament. the 650 folk that you and I and everyone else pays to come up with the complex solutions isn't the body being given that responsibility.
Yes, true Bob, but if we had to start voting for Cabinet members we would be forever in the polling booth - especially if Jezza was ever to get in power.
From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
The transition period that Britain will need can only be granted by a vote from the 27 members of the EU and it just takes one to veto it. A prolonged state of flux is not in the Republic of Ireland's interests
Yes, but it allows them to park a problem - everybody likes to do that! For us, it allows us to sort ourselves out - it has been a complete shambles so far!
Cancel Brexit because we can't control a border ? Move the border into the sea and treat the island as an island ? Stay in the customs union in case someone opens fire at a customs post?
It's unfortunate as you said, that the GFA is breaking down for other reasons, but do the people of NI or ROI really want a return to violence over this? There are probably factions that do, but these guys will resort to violence with any excuse. Should we appease them ?
This issue has to be dealt with in as practical way as possible (probably no plan will be deemed ideal for all parties involved) - but we can't make it a deal breaker, we have to get on with it.
You ask 'so what shall we do?'. All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one. The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? After all we have to get on with it. Any ideas yourself?
All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one - No, they voted on the principle and not the finite detail.
The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they? Yes, they are in charge for now.
Any ideas yourself? - No, I work everyday to pay 650 folk to come up with the complex solutions that arise as a result of a majority General Election vote. Things like Universal Credit, NHS funding, Overseas Aid, Quantitative Easing etc are all too complex for an ordinary voter like me to to offer solutions for the elected Government - so I pay them to do it for me.
I appreciate what you're saying, voters voted and politicians have to make it happen. The trouble is what the voters voted for seems to be beyond what their politicians can manage .
It could be that the voters voted for the wrong principle, or the wrong politicians, or both.
There is an actual impact on real lives as a result of the vote, but the management of that impact seems non existent.
I sat and watched every minute of May's speech today waiting for her to announce a solution to the Irish border. It seems she announced one, the common travel area will continue and there will be no border checks. Yet later in the speech May referred to control of the UK borders in a slightly different context positioning the UK out of the EU.
It looks as if even in one speech today May directly contradicted herself. However if we can assume that the common travel area in Ireland will continue, and there will be no border checks there, then one of the supposed major planks of brexit, control of the UK borders, will simply not happen.
That is one part of the principle people voted for abandoned, not implemented.
From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
The transition period that Britain will need can only be granted by a vote from the 27 members of the EU and it just takes one to veto it. A prolonged state of flux is not in the Republic of Ireland's interests
Yes, but it allows them to park a problem - everybody likes to do that! For us, it allows us to sort ourselves out - it has been a complete shambles so far!
EU has been anti British and our heritage, since day one. In line with the intention of this thread, it’s just a joke
What about the countries who joined after us? Were they already "anti British and our heritage", and just joined to be part of the GB-hate-in? Did they gaze from afar in envy, thinking "if only we could be "anti British and [their] heritage" with others, rather than being out on a limb with our "anti British and [their] heritage" philosophy? It feels wrong being "anti British and [their] heritage" in relative isolation, when there, just over the border, so close you can almost smell it, there is another nation that is "anti British and [their] heritage", who can happily join hands with fellow EU members and celebrate their "anti British and [their] heritage" - ness, together, as one.
Or did they become "anti British and our heritage" once they joined, just for shits and giggles? "We have always quite liked the British, with their milky tea, bad weather and quirky sense of humour, but what the hell, lets go "anti British and [their]heritage" it'll be a lark wont it.."
What about those countries that didn't exist when we joined the EU? How do they stand on the whole "anti British and our heritage" issue? Were they formed solely so they could partake in the entire "anti British and our heritage" bun-fight, was it drafted into their constitution from day one, or did they have to sign a caveat on joining that said "despite your previous good relationship with Britain, we now expect you to be "anti British and [their] heritage""?
EU has been anti British and our heritage, since day one. In line with the intention of this thread, it’s just a joke
What about the countries who joined after us? Were they already "anti British and our heritage", and just joined to be part of the GB-hate-in? Did they gaze from afar in envy, thinking "if only we could be "anti British and [their] heritage" with others, rather than being out on a limb with our "anti British and [their] heritage" philosophy? It feels wrong being "anti British and [their] heritage" in relative isolation, when there, just over the border, so close you can almost smell it, there is another nation that is "anti British and [their] heritage", who can happily join hands with fellow EU members and celebrate their "anti British and [their] heritage" - ness, together, as one.
Or did they become "anti British and our heritage" once they joined, just for shits and giggles? "We have always quite liked the British, with their milky tea, bad weather and quirky sense of humour, but what the hell, lets go "anti British and [their]heritage" it'll be a lark wont it.."
What about those countries that didn't exist when we joined the EU? How do they stand on the whole "anti British and our heritage" issue? Were they formed solely so they could partake in the entire "anti British and our heritage" bun-fight, was it drafted into their constitution from day one, or did they have to sign a caveat on joining that said "despite your previous good relationship with Britain, we now expect you to be "anti British and [their] heritage""?
I think we should be told...
This is a fairly good Stewart Lee impression
Thanks Leuth, I had his voice in my head as I wrote it!
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The perceived 'Remainers' upper hand often comprised denigrating 'Leaver' sources as a response to points made rather than engaging in the issues or branding advocates of the 'Leave' case racist, uneducated and other personal slurs.
Not all posters adopted that stance I should add.
The one thing I'll single out from the 'Remain' campaign generally was the repeated meme that to stay in the EEA we had to stay in the EU. In other words the two were quite deliberately incorrectly conflated as a scare tactic even though factually incorrect.
When the unexpected 'Leave' result was declared there was a complete about turn and the 'soft' Brexit meme evolved. Guess what? the main plank of this is to remain within the EEA!
As I've often said, as one who voted 'Leave,' I think the 'Leave' negotiators are inept in the extreme and I favour joining EFTA in the short to medium term.
For your one example, you know there are many, many more massive whoppers that were told by the other side mate. (see above).
If only there had been some public spirited experts who could have warned us about this Brexshit mayhem. Oh, apparently there were, but Gove knew better and told people that it didn't matter what experts thought. Now the pigeons are coming home to roost:
I am not the only one that dreads a future ruled forever by the 'democratically' elected Jacob Rees Mogg and his ilk. Free market Tories ought to rejoice that such choice exists for some of us.
What the brexiters don't seem to like is having to implement the result because they don't seem to know how to do it, and they want others to magic up practical solutions on their behalf, solutions that are contradictory and virtually impossible.
Maybe they don't know how because it's not their job to know how? Why do people on here expect a random bloke to have a solution to every single issue they've come up with because of the result? Claim that people didn't fully know what they were voting for, fine, no arguments against that. If the remain campaign would have done a better job in highlighting all of these issues, maybe the result would have gone the other way.
I agree the remain campaign was inept. However, personally I and many others on here and on other social media platforms repeatedly explained the issues in a far better way than the politicians did. And Brexiters just kept repeating "scaremongering" over and over. They had no interest in listening. I think every single issue was debated on here, and 95% of the time, remain held the upper hand. All we got was "scaremongering" thrown back at us.
The perceived 'Remainers' upper hand often comprised denigrating 'Leaver' sources as a response to points made rather than engaging in the issues or branding advocates of the 'Leave' case racist, uneducated and other personal slurs.
Not all posters adopted that stance I should add.
The one thing I'll single out from the 'Remain' campaign generally was the repeated meme that to stay in the EEA we had to stay in the EU. In other words the two were quite deliberately incorrectly conflated as a scare tactic even though factually incorrect.
When the unexpected 'Leave' result was declared there was a complete about turn and the 'soft' Brexit meme evolved. Guess what? the main plank of this is to remain within the EEA!
As I've often said, as one who voted 'Leave,' I think the 'Leave' negotiators are inept in the extreme and I favour joining EFTA in the short to medium term.
As posted elsewhere, @LenGlover some two thirds of the electorate support staying in the CU and SM. And if EEA membership outcomes were simplified we can be sure that would hold the same support. And this is very logical for the 48% remain vote don't wish to leave anything and the Leave vote is split between a Norway style deal or TWO, I.e., nothing!
What has happened since the election is that the negotiations have stalled and your(our) view is now aligned with Labour Party policy!
The Labour Party conference will support this because it's a winning move. Why?
You and I support the Heseltine free trade view. Johnson, Gove, Farage and their ilk want something altogether different.
May cannot choose between these two mutually exclusive outcomes so what does she do? Stands up in Florence and parrots Labour party policy. And at the same time looks to time limit the interim period so that she can remain consistent with her ludicrous hard Brexit position from earlier in the year.
She's playing for time but politics will probably take her out in the New Year. GDP growth falling below that of Italy and no real plan for Brexit 18 months after the vote is not sustainable. By Christmas it will be 18 months and May simply has no moves. She couldn't even sack Johnson the other day!
From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
The transition period that Britain will need can only be granted by a vote from the 27 members of the EU and it just takes one to veto it. A prolonged state of flux is not in the Republic of Ireland's interests
Yes, but it allows them to park a problem - everybody likes to do that! For us, it allows us to sort ourselves out - it has been a complete shambles so far!
Brexit means brexit
But if you give yourself enough time to sort out an exit that suits all parties, it is still Brexit. Why are some people so against that - It defies logic! We have been in since 1973 - surely putting a gun to everybody's head and forcing them to rush it is not going to help anybody. It certainly won't help us.
From what I have heard about May's speech today, it might be sensible - stating the need for a transitionary period after 2019. My only issue is, it probably needs to be 5 years rather than 2. It is ridiculous imposing this tight deadline to extracate us from years of ties. Many, many businesses are affected by this as they trade in the single market - including my own. Can't Brexiters just accept we are leaving and want it done properly?
The transition period that Britain will need can only be granted by a vote from the 27 members of the EU and it just takes one to veto it. A prolonged state of flux is not in the Republic of Ireland's interests
Yes, but it allows them to park a problem - everybody likes to do that! For us, it allows us to sort ourselves out - it has been a complete shambles so far!
Brexit means brexit
But if you give yourself enough time to sort out an exit that suits all parties, it is still Brexit. Why are some people so against that - It defies logic! We have been in since 1973 - surely putting a gun to everybody's head and forcing them to rush it is not going to help anybody. It certainly won't help us.
With the way the country is so split on this topic, it might do us a lot of good to have a General Election before anything is finalized.
Comments
The one thing that I'd quite like the UK Government to do is to be honest with people (in the UK and outside).
I'd like a practical resolution, but nothing, in terms of trade, that has been put forward by the Government is practical and realistic.
Despite what has been stated by May, Davis and others, it is logically impossible to assume that the UK can have the current arrangements at the border without retaining the current relationship.
It does not help that the current Government is beholden to the DUP (virtually the only pro-Brexit politicians in Northern Ireland), so that it looks much more likely that we will see Vince Clarke's Assembly than the Stormont Assembly reformed any time soon. A fundamental requirement of the Good Friday Agreement is that the UK Government is neutral regarding much of the political disputes in Northern Ireland. While the supremely ineffective James Brokenshire is doing his best to ensure that no-one pays any attention to what the Government says, I do not believe that the current position is such that would encourage members of Sinn Fein to view T May as an honest broker (notwithstanding the fact that, by their abstentionist policies, they are, just as much as the DUP, providing an increased majority for the Conservatives).
For what it is worth, I think that the personalities at the top of DUP/Sinn Fein make ongoing tension likely in any event (and for this I do blame the DUP more, despite how much I despise Sinn Fein) - but the Brexit vote, and its aftermath have made the situation much, much more fraught.
Regarding the possibility for violence, it will be increased, if for no other reason than that the terrorists (like them all) love social and economic despair in the young. If their opportunities are limited, for whatever reason, they prove fertile recruiting ground for extremists. The economy in Northern Ireland is fragile (or to use the technical term, shite) at the best of times - anything (such as barriers to trade - either with the rest of the EU or the rest of the UK) that makes things more difficult, will have a very significant impact.
And finally (as Cyril Fletcher might have been inclined to say - for those of us of a certain age) the problem is that the UK has form in terms of appeasing those believed to be likely to "resort to violence": a cynic might even say that that is how we got to where we are now (I'd take a look at the history behind the creation of Northern Ireland).
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brexit-uk-wont-leave-the-eu-and-will-one-day-join-the-euro-says-lord-heseltine/ar-AAsknsX?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=mailsignout
Not normally someone I agree with! We live in strange times.
I didn't mean anything by posting this thread, honest!.
All the people who voted brexit will be able to answer that one - No, they voted on the principle and not the finite detail.
The Conservative government and their brexit team will also be able to answer that one won't they?
Yes, they are in charge for now.
Any ideas yourself? - No, I work everyday to pay 650 folk to come up with the complex solutions that arise as a result of a majority General Election vote. Things like Universal Credit, NHS funding, Overseas Aid, Quantitative Easing etc are all too complex for an ordinary voter like me to to offer solutions for the elected Government - so I pay them to do it for me.
Not all posters adopted that stance I should add.
The one thing I'll single out from the 'Remain' campaign generally was the repeated meme that to stay in the EEA we had to stay in the EU. In other words the two were quite deliberately incorrectly conflated as a scare tactic even though factually incorrect.
When the unexpected 'Leave' result was declared there was a complete about turn and the 'soft' Brexit meme evolved. Guess what? the main plank of this is to remain within the EEA!
As I've often said, as one who voted 'Leave,' I think the 'Leave' negotiators are inept in the extreme and I favour joining EFTA in the short to medium term.
I recall linking to this http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/open-britain-video-single-market-nigel-farage-anna-soubry_uk_582ce0a0e4b09025ba310fce
For your one example, you know there are many, many more massive whoppers that were told by the other side mate. (see above).
I absolutely agree that we live in a representative democracy and my representative (albeit I didn't vote for her) is supposed to represent me and the system means that the electorate put their faith in their MP representing their best interests. One of the reasons why referendums should not have a place in that representative democracy - but hey ho that's another story!!
Nobody voted for the the Government (executive) - they are self-appointed by the leader of the party with the most votes. I didn't vote for David Davies or Liam Fox to represent me in the negotiations, or for a buffoon to represent our foreign policy.
If laws are to be passed then Parliament should decide, not the Government without recourse to Parliament. the 650 folk that you and I and everyone else pays to come up with the complex solutions isn't the body being given that responsibility.
Taking back control my arse.
It could be that the voters voted for the wrong principle, or the wrong politicians, or both.
There is an actual impact on real lives as a result of the vote, but the management of that impact seems non existent.
I sat and watched every minute of May's speech today waiting for her to announce a solution to the Irish border. It seems she announced one, the common travel area will continue and there will be no border checks. Yet later in the speech May referred to control of the UK borders in a slightly different context positioning the UK out of the EU.
It looks as if even in one speech today May directly contradicted herself. However if we can assume that the common travel area in Ireland will continue, and there will be no border checks there, then one of the supposed major planks of brexit, control of the UK borders, will simply not happen.
That is one part of the principle people voted for abandoned, not implemented.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41374020
What has happened since the election is that the negotiations have stalled and your(our) view is now aligned with Labour Party policy!
The Labour Party conference will support this because it's a winning move. Why?
You and I support the Heseltine free trade view. Johnson, Gove, Farage and their ilk want something altogether different.
May cannot choose between these two mutually exclusive outcomes so what does she do? Stands up in Florence and parrots Labour party policy. And at the same time looks to time limit the interim period so that she can remain consistent with her ludicrous hard Brexit position from earlier in the year.
She's playing for time but politics will probably take her out in the New Year. GDP growth falling below that of Italy and no real plan for Brexit 18 months after the vote is not sustainable. By Christmas it will be 18 months and May simply has no moves. She couldn't even sack Johnson the other day!