We can stay in the EU

[dsr]

Who knows for certain?, but I think it's v difficult to argue with the point that there is most likely a significant majority who would prefer a softer brexit than a hard one.
This is pretty much based on arithmetic.
52 to 48 is a very slender majority, and since people voted for brexit for all sorts of reasons we can deduce that at least 2% of the voters voted leave in the anticipation of a soft landing.
I would imagine that currently the percentage of leave voters favoring a so-called "soft brexit", would be significantly greater than that 2 % gap, and then add on to this the number of people who have joined the electoral roll since brexit, who (according to all surveys), would vote overwhelmingly to remain in the EU.
I don't think anyone can argue that the entire 52% voted for the "hard brexit" model, though I agree it is impossible to quantify. The only way would be to have another vote, which no one wants at present.

Nobody wants a hard Brexit. What everybody who wants to leave wants, is a Brexit where we keep all the good bits of the EU but ditch all the bad bits. The main difference between hard and soft is how much people are prepared to pay to keep the good bits.

[Devils_Advocate]

Which official sources? And are all the MPs called Kenneth Clark?

You don't seem to understand the difference between singular and plural. As for your other question it's about time you right wing people learned to find information and fact check for yourselves as it is this lazy and gullable attitude that got us in this mess in the first place.

According to my more unooficial sources the talks are proving more difficult than first imagined but there is still hope we can get out of the hole we have dug for ourselves

[JohnMcGreal]

What everybody who wants to leave wants, is a Brexit where we keep all the good bits of the EU but ditch all the bad bits.

[dsr]

You don't seem to understand the difference between singular and plural. As for your other question it's about time you right wing people learned to find information and fact check for yourselves as it is this lazy and gullable attitude that got us in this mess in the first place.

According to my more unooficial sources the talks are proving more difficult than first imagined but there is still hope we can get out of the hole we have dug for ourselves

Googling "official sources conservative mps talks to stay in EU" gets nothing. So instead of getting all clever-clever and saying I need to look it up for myself, just tell me - what official sources say that Conservative MPs are holding talks about staying in the EU? I'll put in frankly - I don't believe there are any such official sources, and I want you to prove me wrong.

[dsr]

I suppose I should have gone on to say that that can't happen. Though I would have thought that to be pretty obvious.

[Lancasterclaret]

Pretty obvious to us "remainers".

Not to the people promoting leave before, during and after the referendum.

Remember "we can have a good a deal as we have now"? Thankfully David Davis hasn't got any power in negotiating with the EU anymore and has rightly been binned for coming out with such blatant rubbish..........oh

[nil_desperandum]

Looks like it may not be as you were on the same terms. talk of new terms that would include loss of the rebate and possibly taking the euro amongst others. changing our mind could be more damaging than leaving with no deal.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 90886.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unlike the majority on here, I watched this debate on BBC Parliament on Wednesday evening, which of course took place after my post. This was just one contribution to the debate, and if you are going to accept this as being the view of the entire EU then you would also have to accept Farage's contribution to the debate as being entirely representative of the UK position. (Farage actually stated that whilst the referendum result was 52 / 48 the Gen Election result revealed that 85% were now in favour of Brexit, which is twisting statistics to extremes)
Verhofstadt, (along with many others of course), has long been critical of Britain’s annual rebate from the European Union, and I suppose you could say that he is representing one extreme view, whereas the position of Davis and Fox etc. has been on the other extreme. (i.e uncompromising on both sides, and therefore a bad outcome for both sides). In reality it's most likely that the moderates on both sides will prevail, and there will be a deal in which both sides can claim some kind of victory.
If it comes down to retaining the status quo or no deal, then I doubt that there would be a majority in the EU who would insist on us losing our rebate or joining the Euro in order to remain, and thus blow the deal out of the water. For a while though I'm sure we can anticipate political posturing and extreme views on both sides. (That's usually what happens in the early stages of negotiation).

[Mala591]

My prediction:

We will leave the EU but have tariff free trade access to it.

We will allow the EU to have tariff free trade access to the UK.

We will stay in the EU customs union BUT have a special agreement that we can trade outside the EU without any of the current penalties (this will allow a soft customs border between Northern Ireland and Ireland to be maintained).

[aggi]

Nobody wants a hard Brexit. What everybody who wants to leave wants, is a Brexit where we keep all the good bits of the EU but ditch all the bad bits. The main difference between hard and soft is how much people are prepared to pay to keep the good bits.

There's also disagreement as to what the good bits of the EU are though.

Is free movement of people a good or bad thing? The graduate who wants to go and work in Germany or Spain will likely think it's a good thing, as will the firm who needs to hire a bilingual accountant. On the other hand, the factory worker who's worried about losing their job to cheap European labour will probably think it's a bad thing, as will those worried about muslim immigrants taking over the country.

[Imploding Turtle]

There's also disagreement as to what the good bits of the EU are though.

Is free movement of people a good or bad thing? The graduate who wants to go and work in Germany or Spain will likely think it's a good thing, as will the firm who needs to hire a bilingual accountant. On the other hand, the factory worker who's worried about losing their job to cheap European labour will probably think it's a bad thing, as will those worried about muslim immigrants taking over the country.

In my view, and the view of seemingly all economists, it's a good thing. A lot of Leavers like to complain that we pay more into the EU than we get back in rebates but they don't like to also point out that with freedom of movement we benefit from the state educations of other EU nations when their citizens come and contribute to out economy.

Leavers like to compartmentalise their criticism because when you look at the bigger picture you can see that while in one area it looks like it costs us money they don't want you to see that a benefit from another area helps make up for that difference.

[aggi]

In my view, and the view of seemingly all economists, it's a good thing. A lot of Leavers like to complain that we pay more into the EU than we get back in rebates but they don't like to also point out that with freedom of movement we benefit from the state educations of other EU nations when their citizens come and contribute to out economy.

Leavers like to compartmentalise their criticism because when you look at the bigger picture you can see that while in one area it looks like it costs us money they don't want you to see that a benefit from another area helps make up for that difference.

What makes economic sense isn't necessarily the best decision though, that's a whole different argument. It obviously needs to be taken into account but a lot of arguments against are willing to accept an economic hit for an ideological decision (e.g. the change in culture and your view on whether that is good or bad).

[ThinLizzy]

I had an Epiphany last night. I decided that all people are equal, life is wonderful. All people deserve respect regardless of who or where they are from. It was quite an experience. I saw doves, butterflies and all sorts of wonderful creatures. I saw people dancing around maypoles loving life. It was so perfect. Cats were hugging dogs, tigers were hugging antelopes, snakes were kissing rats, humans were at peace. As time went on that changed. The Dogs got irate, the tigers got hungry, the snakes saw prey and the humans still thought they were f*cking different! Jesus! Wake up! We were, are and always will be what we are. Quit the love/hate PC crap. I hate virtually everybody WITH A PASSION! If you are sat there thinking you can change the world for the better. DO IT, bit don't do it for HUMANITY. Humanity screwed this world up a long time ago. Go out and do something for the environment and animals!

[Bin Ont Turf]

Is free movement of people a good or bad thing?

It's a bad thing.

Yet a Slovakian (example) coming here to earn money to get them through university (and I've met many) isn't a bad thing.

[aggi]

Sounds like the plan is for transition arrangements and staying with the current border arrangements for a "period" after Brexit.

From Philip Hammond's speech this morning

So, how do we achieve this “Brexit for Britain”? ...

By agreeing frictionless customs arrangements to facilitate trade across our borders – and crucially – to keep the land border on the island of Ireland open and free-flowing.

To do this in the context of our wider objectives will be challenging.

It will almost certainly involve the deployment of new technology.

And therefore we’ll almost certainly need an implementation period, outside the customs union itself, but with current customs border arrangements remaining in place, until new long-term arrangements are up and running.

Familiar phrases on immigration, my personal view is that we'll see little change (although some may pretend it has):

Just as the British people understand the benefits of trade – so, too, they understand how important it is to business to be able to access global talent and to move individuals around their organisations.

So, while we seek to manage migration, we do not seek to shut it down.

A lot of rowing back from other Conservative Party comments on Brexit. Comment from Sky's Political Correspondent Lewis Goodall was Mr Hammond's speech was "extraordinary", and added: "(He's) given up pretending he thinks there are benefits to Brexit. Confirmation that May's authority has gone."

[claretandy]

Sounds like the plan is for transition arrangements and staying with the current border arrangements for a "period" after Brexit.

From Philip Hammond's speech this morning

So, how do we achieve this “Brexit for Britain”? ...

By agreeing frictionless customs arrangements to facilitate trade across our borders – and crucially – to keep the land border on the island of Ireland open and free-flowing.

To do this in the context of our wider objectives will be challenging.

It will almost certainly involve the deployment of new technology.

And therefore we’ll almost certainly need an implementation period, outside the customs union itself, but with current customs border arrangements remaining in place, until new long-term arrangements are up and running.

Familiar phrases on immigration, my personal view is that we'll see little change (although some may pretend it has):

Just as the British people understand the benefits of trade – so, too, they understand how important it is to business to be able to access global talent and to move individuals around their organisations.

So, while we seek to manage migration, we do not seek to shut it down.

A lot of rowing back from other Conservative Party comments on Brexit. Comment from Sky's Political Correspondent Lewis Goodall was Mr Hammond's speech was "extraordinary", and added: "(He's) given up pretending he thinks there are benefits to Brexit. Confirmation that May's authority has gone."

As he said at the weekend, nothing has changed from the Lancaster house speech the prime minister made.

[quoonbeatz]

So, while we seek to manage migration, we do not seek to shut it down.

the really silly thing here is that we already could manage migration, both eu and non-eu, the government just chooses not to.

[aggi]

the really silly thing here is that we already could manage migration, both eu and non-eu, the government just chooses not to.

True. Basically you're allowed three months of what people picture as "Freedom of Movement" in a country. After that you need Sufficient resources not to be a burden on the benefit system of the country

The reason we've never really bothered to enforce this is it would be a logistical nightmare and cost more than it would save. If we're planning on enforcing this then people should be prepared for it to be a legal requirement to produce an ID card when demanded.

[Lancasterclaret]

Wouldn't bother claretandy.

His blue passport is laminated and carried by him at all times.

[Lancasterclaret]

And didn't the first day of talks go well?

In football terms, Davis takes the kick off and boots it into his own net, celebrating wildly with UKIP while everyone else goes "WTF? That was the EU position all the time"