Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Lord Beamish]

I don't remember it and searches on here and google don't throw anything up. I think you've shown enough times that when things are filtered through your understanding what comes out the other end as what you remember isn't always the same as what was written.

Rather like his spelling of ‘self-aggrandisement’. When it went through his spelling filter it got truly mangled.

[TheFamilyCat]

FFS, he told you that it was perfectly acceptable to spell it with a ‘z’. He even copied and pasted from the dictionary as evidence. You know he’s right, why are you dragging it up again?

[Lord Beamish]

FFS, he told you that it was perfectly acceptable to spell it with a ‘z’. He even copied and pasted from the dictionary as evidence. You know he’s right, why are you dragging it up again?

He brought up the American English spelling as a gambit to accuse me of misspelling. The way he originally spelled it was nowhere near either accepted method.

He spelled it “selfaggrizement”.

[aggi]

I don't think I've read you say that, but if I'm on-site with a client on a busy Brexit day I can miss 500 posts.

It just seems to me that human nature would mean that if: a) May retained more power due to a majority and no Commons vote, and b) she used this power to continue to use "no deal" as a bargaining chip, that would have been bound to lead to a different Brussels offer. It's a negotiation, not a fait accompli. Most people now accept that the Irish issue is a political construct not a legal one. The GFA agreement is delicate, but not unsolvable.

For example, as I have mentioned a couple of time in recent days in reference to German interviews, Brussels could have offered a new type of Customs Union for a totally new "outer ring" of the EU, one in which we have much more power than Turkey, and even more power than small EU members. That would be conceivable, because the EU needs our soft power, money, security and intelligence more than it needs the likes of Romania to be a member state. I bet then even many Brexiteers may have supported it (not even the ERG wanted a "hard Brexit" at the time, but they did want a FTA, and maybe only them would have been in opposition). That's why Germany are panicking now, they see these advantages from the UK disappearing.

So yes, maybe May's red lines would have had to shift to some degree, but a stronger stance in negotiations would I feel sure have led to different possibilities opening up and a different Withdrawal Agreement as a result.

But realistically No Deal would still have been an empty threat given we didn't bother preparing for it until the deadline was pretty much there. You describe it as a negotiation but it started with May's red lines and the EU's red lines and neither have really compromised so there wasn't much variation in terms of what was going to come out of it.

The "outer ring" idea was proposed not long after the Brexit vote by a European thinktank but from what I remember it still involved accepting some EU rulings and paying into the EU budget which wouldn't have passed the red lines (even if the EU could be convinced by it).

I'm not sure about your assertion that the Irish issue is political, not legal. I think many are still viewing it as a legal issue or else we'd be a lot further along than we are now.

[If it be your will]

.

[CombatClaret]

For example, as I have mentioned a couple of time in recent days in reference to German interviews, Brussels could have offered a new type of Customs Union for a totally new "outer ring" of the EU, one in which we have much more power than Turkey, and even more power than small EU members.

I'd call it Germany++
So on a par with Germany but not in the Euro and outside the Schengen Agreement.

Oh wait, that's what we had, the best deal in EU

[TheFamilyCat]

He brought up the American English spelling as a gambit to accuse me of misspelling. The way he originally spelled it was nowhere near either accepted method.

He spelled it “selfaggrizement”.

I know and it was as funny as it was painful to watch you futilely explain the difference between a simple spelling mistake and basically making a word up.

He was still right though, obviously.

[ClaretAndJew]

You all having a nice Brexit, aye?

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

politics.co.uk finally say what we all are thinking.

Brexiters oppose a second referendum for one simple reason: They think they'll lose

https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-anal ... e-reason-t" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


People like Ringo throw around the word "democracy" as if they value it, but they don't. He knows that the corrupt Leave campaign won on a foundation of lies and fear of foreigners and are **** scared that if we measure the will of the people again that the people are much better informed as to their lies, corruption and fearmongering.

Don't listen to Ringo. He's an enemy of democracy, just like anyone else who thinks that making sure the public hasn't changed its mind is some how anti-democratic.

Wow man, you just burned him to the ground.

[Imploding Turtle]

As the saying goes: **** doesn't burn

[CombatClaret]

But this isn't how it has worked. The UK wanted to negotiate a trade deal in parallel with the withdrawal agreement, but the EU flatly said 'no'. They insisted the withdrawal agreement was settled first in order to have us over a barrel before we enter the trade talks. That was the exact strategy of the EU, and it has worked an absolute treat.

It's not about anyone 'letting us' its about following a rule book we agreed to.

For example how are we supposed to agree trade deals on fish at the same time as negotiating if we remain in the EU Common Fisheries Policy?
You can't do both at the same time because you need the laws in place to build the trade on top of.

[dsr]

It's not about anyone 'letting us' its about following a rule book we agreed to.

For example how are we supposed to agree trade deals on fish at the same time as negotiating if we remain in the EU Common Fisheries Policy?
You can't do both at the same time because you need the laws in place to build the trade on top of.

Of course you can do both at the same time. We're not talking about trade deals with third parties here, we're talking about a trade deal with the EU. When you are talking about making a deal with anyone about anything, you don't start by agreeing whether or not there will be a deal, and then deciding what the terms are. You work out the terms first and then both sides mutually pick what's best out of all the options.

[TonbridgeClaret]

politics.co.uk finally say what we all are thinking.

Brexiters oppose a second referendum for one simple reason: They think they'll lose

https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-anal ... e-reason-t" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


People like Ringo throw around the word "democracy" as if they value it, but they don't. He knows that the corrupt Leave campaign won on a foundation of lies and fear of foreigners and are **** scared that if we measure the will of the people again that the people are much better informed as to their lies, corruption and fearmongering.

Don't listen to Ringo. He's an enemy of democracy, just like anyone else who thinks that making sure the public hasn't changed its mind is some how anti-democratic.

Sorry Turtle, I like some of your posts, but you can’t really use an article by Alex Andreou of ‘Remainiacs’ fame and hope for it to be taken seriously.

[Imploding Turtle]

Sorry Turtle, I like some of your posts, but you can’t really use an article by Alex Andreou of ‘Remainiacs’ fame and hope for it to be taken seriously.

Never heard of him, but is claim in the headline false? It's pretty clear to me that fear of losing is the only reason these people are so opposed to a second vote, whether it's a re-run or a vote on the final deal, no deal or change of mind.

[CombatClaret]

Of course you can do both at the same time. We're not talking about trade deals with third parties here, we're talking about a trade deal with the EU. When you are talking about making a deal with anyone about anything, you don't start by agreeing whether or not there will be a deal, and then deciding what the terms are. You work out the terms first and then both sides mutually pick what's best out of all the options.

It's really simple
The terms of the withdrawal agreement will dictate the terms of any future trade deal.
Cart, then horse.

That's why both parties agreed as part of Article 50 to make "sufficient progress” on the Withdrawal Agreement before embarking on the new trade treaty, let alone completing it.

[dsr]

It's really simple
The terms of the withdrawal agreement will dictate the terms of any future trade deal.
Cart, then horse.

That's why both parties agreed as part of Article 50 to make "sufficient progress” on the Withdrawal Agreement before embarking on the new trade treaty, let alone completing it.

The reason both parties agreed to it is that for the EU, it gives them everything they want; and for the UK, the woman in charge of negotiations is both clueless and unprincipled.

The trade deal after the withdrawal, in any sort of real world scenario, would be part of the withdrawal agreement. Theresa May would have to be an idiot not to think so.

[If it be your will]

.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I'd call it Germany++
So on a par with Germany but not in the Euro and outside the Schengen Agreement.

Oh wait, that's what we had, the best deal in EU

Well indeed, in a trade sense.

The trouble is, the EU became far more than just trade. Our politicians inability to govern is evidence of that.

[martin_p]

Looks like an extension to 30th October has been agreed.

[martin_p]

Well indeed, in a trade sense.

The trouble is, the EU became far more than just trade. Our politicians inability to govern is evidence of that.

Our politicians inability to govern is evidence of nothing more than we have politicians who don’t know how to run a minority government.

[CombatClaret]

Well indeed, in a trade sense.

The trouble is, the EU became far more than just trade. Our politicians inability to govern is evidence of that.

Our own inability to govern our own country is because of somebody else?

[dsr]

Looks like an extension to 30th October has been agreed.

Euro elections. Good.

Apparently they have considered asking Theresa May for a formal pledge that the Brexit supporting MEPs won't be disruptive, but have decided it couldn't be enforced.

[CombatClaret]

Of course you can!

That was the very first climbdown the UK made, to have the sequencing as 'divorce' deal then 'future relations', rather than negotiate them together. At the time David Davis famously (now infamously) said the sequencing would be 'The Row of the Summer". This row didn't last long. This was a really big issue at the time, because sequencing it the way the EU wanted wrecked what little leverage we ever had. This was a truly pivotal moment. After that our only leverage was to threaten no-deal, which the EU just laughed off.

Merkel -
"We can only do an agreement on the future relationship with Britain when all questions about its exit have been cleared up satisfactorily"

"The sooner the UK government is ready for constructive solutions, the sooner we can meet its wish to talk about the future relationship. But first we need to know how the UK government envisages that relationship. It can only be done in that sequence."

Sounds completely logical and I cannot see any other way in which it could be done than in this linear fashion. Probably why it was agreed to on day one.
I love the business like efficiency the EU has gone about this while we sh*t the bed. Those are the people I want negotiating on my behalf, the irony.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Our politicians inability to govern is evidence of nothing more than we have politicians who don’t know how to run a minority government.

Not at all.

It is very clear to me that a PM comfortable standing on their own feet in the world, and a PM comfortable sitting down with 27 other leaders, are two very different skill sets (ditto every rung down in government).

It’s a bit like a company chief executive versus a public sector chief executive - totally different mindset.

May has realised she will miss the council of 28 too much. In a sense. She is one of them. She isn’t a leader, she is a bureaucrat.

[Imploding Turtle]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-poli ... s-47855440" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

31st of October

[Imploding Turtle]

Start the meme machine, boys and girls. We got a lot of Halloweening to do.

[If it be your will]

.

[Greenmile]

Our own inability to govern our own country is because of somebody else?

Everything is someone else’s fault (usually the EU’s) when you’re a brexiter.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I hope she’s booked in her next begging meeting with the EU for October.

[Murger]

Cue the 'we're definitely leaving by the 31st October' speech. Christ she's a waste of time. How can she be allowed to continue to humiliate this once great country?

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

Oh no, does that mean the Festival Of Brexit will be in November?
It will be a complete washout.

[Caballo]

Start the meme machine, boys and girls. We got a lot of Halloweening to do.

Or not!

https://futurism.com/eu-parliament-pass ... d-link-tax

[SmudgetheClaret]

If your not keen on Nigel Farage your gonna have a meltdown at the EU elections if you don't believe me go on FB and ask who's voting for the Brexit Party ? UKIP was a shock in 2014 but this is gonna be historical good old PR voting system..

[SmudgetheClaret]

Or not!

https://futurism.com/eu-parliament-pass ... d-link-tax

Leftists cannot meme it's common knowledge..

[TheFamilyCat]

If your not keen on Nigel Farage your gonna have a meltdown at the EU elections if you don't believe me go on FB and ask who's voting for the Brexit Party ? UKIP was a shock in 2014 but this is gonna be historical good old PR voting system..

Go on then, enlighten me. What exactly is the point on the Brexit Party standing in the elections for an organisation they want to leave?

If they do get MEPs, what exactly are they going to do?

[Lancasterclaret]

If your not keen on Nigel Farage your gonna have a meltdown at the EU elections if you don't believe me go on FB and ask who's voting for the Brexit Party ? UKIP was a shock in 2014 but this is gonna be historical good old PR voting system..

I'd never have guessed that Facebook would be full of people who think Farage is ace.

[Lancasterclaret]

Go on then, enlighten me. What exactly is the point on the Brexit Party standing in the elections for an organisation they want to leave?

If they do get MEPs, what exactly are they going to do?

What the UKIP ones do.

Collect salary and expenses for doing **** all.

No wonder people like Tommy Robinson survive on cash donations if people are happy to actually vote for people to do that.

[nil_desperandum]

If your not keen on Nigel Farage your gonna have a meltdown at the EU elections if you don't believe me go on FB and ask who's voting for the Brexit Party ? UKIP was a shock in 2014 but this is gonna be historical good old PR voting system..

I'm prepared to wager that Brexit + UKip votes will fall below 52% so that would hardly be an endorsement of a "clean break" / "cliff edge" (or whatever you're going to call it) brexit.

[TheFamilyCat]

What the UKIP ones do.

Collect salary and expenses for doing **** all.

No wonder people like Tommy Robinson survive on cash donations if people are happy to actually vote for people to do that.

I know that’s the reality but I was looking forward to smudge’s answer. I had my bingo card ready.

[RingoMcCartney]

I don't remember it and searches on here and google don't throw anything up. I think you've shown enough times that when things are filtered through your understanding what comes out the other end as what you remember isn't always the same as what was written.

In september / october pointed out that the announcement by Bercow , earlier that year that millions had been earmarked for eu parliamentary elections that we shouldn't be participating in was proof of an establishment and political class stitch up to stop Brexit. You said it was "Just contingency plans". I even think Lancaster claret said I was now on a establishment conspiracy tin foil hat rant.

I've been proven right.

How convenient you don't remember. You don't remember nitpicking over whether it was 850,000 or a million quid!? And you know, as well as I do that many brexit and politics related threads have been deleted. And knowing that, you insist on me digging for it.

Pathetic

If you want to join the long list of Remoaners who simply can't accept I was right about something by swallowing your pride and having the good grace to admit it, that's entirely up to you.

[NottsClaret]

Not really following too closely these days, but looks like I've got to book yet another Brexit Day now. Luckily I have an understanding boss and he lets me carry them over.

For those who know / care about this still, do you reckon the Euro elections we're now doing will end up being some sort of unofficial referendum?

[RingoMcCartney]

I note how you have to keep repeating yourself and not answering even the most simple question. Even you, the dullard, must have recognised how imprecise your question was. Consent to start something isn’t consent to finish (ask your wife if that’s another concept you struggle to understand.

Weyhey!

The masochistic gift that keeps on giving, has returned for more amusing self-flagellation!

The simple question I asked you was -

" Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum ?" 

You answered "no"

You are wrong. And still can't admit it!

And now after giving up on the idea of adding terms and conditions to the question after it was asked, and you incorrectly answered it.

You're now attempting to squirm away from admitting you messed up by claiming it was too "imprecise" to answer!!



Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!!

It wasn't the question that was too "imprecise".

" Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum ?"

It was your answer! - "no"

The lengths that you Remoaners will go to , to try and save face!

And now you've introduced a whole new aspect to your wriggling.

"Consent" and "wives"

Look at the simple basic question I asked you once again. Were there any brackets containing the word "consent" included in that crystal clear, precise, unambiguous question?

Hi, I'm Burnley Ace and I can't accept I was wrong. And neither can my wife!


This really has got some miles left in it, it really has!

Peas.
It's just like shelling peas!!

[RingoMcCartney]

politics.co.uk finally say what we all are thinking.

Brexiters oppose a second referendum for one simple reason: They think they'll lose

Remoaners want a 2nd referendum for 2 simple facts.

1, They lost the first Peoples Vote.

2. They're scared that if the first referendum is actually implemented, all their predictions of economic catastrophe never materialise, they'll just end up being proven to be the hysterical, gullible sore losers, brexiteers always said they were!

Bless x

[hampsteadclaret]

Wow man, you just burned him to the ground.

So some 'remainer' journalist wrote an article criticising those who would wish to 'Brexit'...Big Deal....bit of a bunfight over who calls the shots over the word 'democratic'.


I'm probably a bit behind on this thread, as I look at it fairly often but no way do I read every post so I'm probably not as clued up as the resident 'experts' [there are many] on this issue.

Can I say though that anybody on the 'Remain' side..that's on here, out there, in Parliament, or batting for the EU..who are arguing for a lengthy extension, say anything longer than about nine months, simply want the cancellation of Brexit, nothing less. Just be honest.

Forget all the guff about needing more time 'to sort the details out' or 'doing things properly so we have an orderly Brexit' - that is so much horse-****
The longer this nonsense drags on, even more the loudmouths will bray..'oh but the Referendum was 36/42/48 months ago, loads of fogeys have died off, more young people can now vote - that vote on 23/6/16 is really irrelevant now..' zzzz

We have seen the can kicked down the road for many miles so far [there' more to come trust me] and that has been the intention since Referendum Day plus 1.

- we voted the 'wrong' way, we were thick we were racist, we didn't get the economics of it, and that original vote would NEVER be allowed to stand.

Not sure where we are now [lost interest] except that more and more delays will be put in place. May will 'unwillingly' go along with this.

It is a matter of time before the EU [who are now totally controlling the timetable] TELL US that as a condition of them granting us..a] b] c] d] etc....we have to have another referendum.

That would put the tin lid on it wouldn't it? - from Cameron's craven caving-in to those right wingers in his party and his offer of a Referendum, to that particular well-supported poll, and then the 'ignoring' of that democratic result, to the position where Tusk, Barnier, Macron, Merkel and the rest TELL US that you must have another referendum [People's Vote my ar$e,.. who voted in the first one ?]


A truly dispiriting situation and an embarrassing disgrace from start to finish.

[Devils_Advocate]

[aggi]

In september / october pointed out that the announcement by Bercow , earlier that year that millions had been earmarked for eu parliamentary elections that we shouldn't be participating in was proof of an establishment and political class stitch up to stop Brexit. You said it was "Just contingency plans". I even think Lancaster claret said I was now on a establishment conspiracy tin foil hat rant.

I've been proven right.

How convenient you don't remember. You don't remember nitpicking over whether it was 850,000 or a million quid!? And you know, as well as I do that many brexit and politics related threads have been deleted. And knowing that, you insist on me digging for it.

Pathetic

If you want to join the long list of Remoaners who simply can't accept I was right about something by swallowing your pride and having the good grace to admit it, that's entirely up to you.

What can I say, I don't remember it. With other posters I'd be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt but with you it's like the boy who cried wolf; you've misrepresented far too many posts previously to take you at face value.

[Mala591]

Customs union vs Independent International trade deals

Being inside the EU customs union would definitely reduce trade barriers and delays across UK/EU borders (the NI/ROI border) and would imo be welcomed by British industry with high levels of EU trade.

The big drawback of remaining in the customs union is that we will be unable to
negotiate our own independent international trade deals. As international trade growth is predicted to significantly out-perform EU trade growth then losing this 'benefit' will have a negative effect on future UK growth.

Should we stay in the EU customs union (which might lead to the withdrawal agreement being passed by parliament) or should we insist on leaving the customs union to persue international trade deals ?

What is YOUR view ?

[Burnley Ace]

Weyhey!

The masochistic gift that keeps on giving, has returned for more amusing self-flagellation!

The simple question I asked you was -

" Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum ?" 

You answered "no"

You are wrong. And still can't admit it!

And now after giving up on the idea of adding terms and conditions to the question after it was asked, and you incorrectly answered it.

You're now attempting to squirm away from admitting you messed up by claiming it was too "imprecise" to answer!!



Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!!

It wasn't the question that was too "imprecise".

" Did the vast majority of labour MPs vote to have an eu referendum ?"

It was your answer! - "no"

The lengths that you Remoaners will go to , to try and save face!

And now you've introduced a whole new aspect to your wriggling.

"Consent" and "wives"

Look at the simple basic question I asked you once again. Were there any brackets containing the word "consent" included in that crystal clear, precise, unambiguous question?

Hi, I'm Burnley Ace and I can't accept I was wrong. And neither can my wife!


This really has got some miles left in it, it really has!

Peas.
It's just like shelling peas!!

Lol the cut ‘n paste dullard is back! Read up on Parliamentary procedure and ask your wife to explain the concept of consent and when it applies.

Poor Ringo still cannot answer the simplest of questions x

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

- we voted the 'wrong' way, we were thick we were racist, we didn't get the economics of it, and that original vote would NEVER be allowed to stand.

Nice to see some people on here finally admitting it.

[summitclaret]

Customs union vs Independent International trade deals

Being inside the EU customs union would definitely reduce trade barriers and delays across UK/EU borders (the NI/ROI border) and would imo be welcomed by British industry with high levels of EU trade.

The big drawback of remaining in the customs union is that we will be unable to
negotiate our own independent international trade deals. As international trade growth is predicted to significantly out-perform EU trade growth then losing this 'benefit' will have a negative effect on future UK growth.

Should we stay in the EU customs union (which might lead to the withdrawal agreement being passed by parliament) or should we insist on leaving the customs union to persue international trade deals ?

What is YOUR view ?

Still want a free trade deal. I would accept a CU as a last resort beung in the PD with the hope a FTD later but if its SM then absolutely no point in leaving.