Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:15 am

Jakubclaret wrote:Both broke electoral law, explained more underneath.
https://youtu.be/nS0JOuoBAr4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So we’re taking the word of random youtubers over the Electoral Commission now, are we?

Nb - I haven’t watched the video you linked. I don’t have time right now.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:18 am

Well prior to dismissing something out of hand perhaps the more sensible option would be to view first, to form a more grounded & accurate opinion to understand the facts.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 am

Call me weird, but yet again its worth stressing that the brexit arguments are still **** weak.

And we are about two weeks from chaos and no one has a sensible plan to sort it.

But we should really engage with leavers and their arguments that remain cheated as much as leave did. That's really going to help.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:26 am

Clarets4me wrote:The British people were told that Harold Wilson had renegotiated our deal with the " European Economic Community " , after the Conservatives had taken the country into the " Common Market " on January 1st 1973. As the name implied, the electorate was told that it was a " Common Market ", where goods and services could be bought and sold without tariffs etc . There was never a Referendum before entry, that happened after the event on 5th June 1975 .

Prior to entry, there had been murmurings about loss of Sovereignty, and you must remember that this was only 30 years after the end of the War. Most men and many women, over 50 were likely to have been in the Military during that time, and a majority of men aged 34 and over would have done their 2 years National Service. Many would have had family killed or seriously wounded during the war. This is a quote from Ted Heath's TV address on entry ....

“There are some in this country who fear that in going into Europe we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty. These fears, I need hardly say, are completely unjustified.”

Heath knew perfectly well he would not win a Referendum, especially if he outlined the true long term aims of the " Common Market ". FCO document 30/1048, dated April 1971 ( Released under the 30 year rule in 2001 ), shows that the Government were fully aware of the long term aims of the European project. Here are a few excerpts .....

11. " Membership of the Communities will involve us in extensive limitations upon our freedom of action. " For the first time ever, Parliament is binding its successors.

" The loss of external sovereignty will however increase as the Community develops, according to the intention of the preamble to the Treaty of Rome "to establish the foundations of an even closer union among the European peoples ".

12. (ii) The power of the European Court to consider the extent to which a UK statute is compatible with Community Law will indirectly involve an innovation for us, as the European Court's decisions will be binding on our courts which might then have to rule on the validity or applicability of the United Kingdom statute.

18..but it will be in the British interest after accession to encourage the development of the Community toward an effectively harmonised economic, fiscal and monetary system and a fairly closely coordinated and consistent foreign and defence policy. If it came to do so then essential aspects of sovereignty both internal and external would indeed increasingly be transferred to the Community itself.

22.. Even with the most dramatic development of the Community the major member states can hardly lose the "last resort" ability to withdraw in much less than three decades. The Community's development could produce before then a period in which the political practicability of withdrawal was doubtful. If the point should ever be reached at which inability to renounce the Treaty (and with it the degeneration of the national institutions which could opt for such a policy) was clear, then sovereignty, external, parliamentary and practical would indeed be diminished. After entry there would be a major responsibility on HMG and on all political parties not to exacerbate public concern by attributing unpopular measures or unfavourable economic developments to the remote and unmanageable workings of the Community.

24 (ii) The transfer of major executive responsibilities to the bureaucratic Commission in Brussels will exacerbate popular feeling of alienation from government.

24 (v) ...The more the Community is developed ... the more Parliamentary sovereignty will be eroded. ...The right ... to withdraw will remain for a very considerable time. ...The sovereignty of the State will surely remain unchallenged for this century at least.

25. The impact of entry upon sovereignty is closely related to the blurring of distinctions between domestic political and foreign affairs, to the greater political responsibility of the bureaucracy of the Community and the lack of effective democratic control.

If you've read this post so far, thank you. You may be of the Remainer pursuasion, a position I respect. However, I hope this shows some of the reasons that some of us feel so strongly about the Sovereignty of the British people, and how it was given away by our elected representatives, after misleading the electorate and without our consent.

Two bent referendums then?

Probably best to have a third "clean" one to sort it out once and for all then don't you think?

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:33 am

Jakubclaret wrote:Both broke electoral law, explained more underneath.
https://youtu.be/nS0JOuoBAr4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HELLO!

CAN'T YOU READ??

The Electoral Commission has rejected allegations that the Remain campaign broke electoral law.

Evidence here, not some random youtube rubbish...

https://www.businessinsider.es/the-elec ... ?r=US&IR=T" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:44 am

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:HELLO!

CAN'T YOU READ??

The Electoral Commission has rejected allegations that the Remain campaign broke electoral law.

Evidence here, not some random youtube rubbish...

https://www.businessinsider.es/the-elec ... ?r=US&IR=T" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Both breached electoral law by overspending more importantly not declaring & even incurred fines for this, I'm not quite sure I like your tone, you are coming across very surly perhaps you've woken up on the wrong side of the bed or the stark realisation a no deal is imminent.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:03 am

Paul Waine wrote:Just read a little bit of the thread above.

Seriously, does anyone think that there are any members of the electorate who truly understand the EU and what it means for the UK to be a member of the EU to cast a vote that is worth counting?

Anyone who believes a second referendum is a good idea - and this is without regard to whether they voted remain or leave in June-2016 - is fooling themselves. What do we really know today that we didn't know in 2016? I wouldn't trust a single one of the 35+ million to know what they are voting for.

As I posted back in December, the only way forward is to rescind Article 50. No begging, no "please can we delay Brexit...", just simple "we aren't leaving." Then go back in and look at reforming the EU from the inside. And, in the meantime, "clean up" our inept political system.

I've been strongly in favour of holding another referendum for a long time, but in all honesty I think we're well past that stage now.

The only sensible option on the table at this very late stage which allows us to keep all of the benefits we currently enjoy and puts an immediate halt to the crisis is a full withdrawal of article 50 with immediate effect.

It will cause a **** storm, and we'll spend the next God knows how many years arguing about what kind of country we want to be, but we can have that argument without a ticking time bomb waiting to go off underneath us.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:08 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:I've been strongly in favour of holding another referendum for a long time, but in all honesty I think we're well past that stage now.

The only sensible option on the table at this very late stage which allows us to keep all of the benefits we currently enjoy and puts an immediate halt to the crisis is a full withdrawal of article 50 with immediate effect.

It will cause a **** storm, and we'll spend the next God knows how many years arguing about what kind of country we want to be, but we can have that argument without a ticking time bomb waiting to go off underneath us.

It’s never too late to do what needs doing and most intelligent people will welcome the thing that we didn’t have in the beginning and that is the “Informed Referendum”.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:18 am

Jakubclaret wrote:the stark realisation a no deal is imminent.

Oooo! I hope so, as an interested observer from a European country I'd love to see the repercussions of that from a safe distance.

However...

SPOILER

it won't happen, there'll be a second referendum and remain will win.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:25 am

Rather than posting my own ramblings, this is the editorial from The Sun today. I agree with every word. I bet most of us do.

THERESA May’s new Brexit defeat represents a catastrophic failure by a Parliament of pygmies.

They handed the British people the right to determine if we left the EU, solemnly pledged to see the result through and made it law.

They have twice now rejected the only available deal and calamitously let the nation down. Many have sold their election promises and constituents down the river.

Three years since the referendum and just 16 days before our scheduled exit, no one even knows if Brexit will happen.

This great country is in the grip of chaos which is terrifying families and crippling businesses. Our politicians should hang their heads in shame.

Mrs May’s deal isn’t great. But it would have got Brexit done, as a weary population desperately wants.

It would have killed off a hideously divisive new referendum and more paralysing uncertainty.

So many MPs have been inept, dishonest or both. Very few escape blame.

For all her admirable resilience Mrs May has made fundamental errors. Not least on Monday when she secured changes from the EU then oversold them on live TV, only to have her own Attorney General knock them down.Given his advice was so pivotal, why was he not in the loop throughout?

Or yesterday, so terrified of Cabinet Remainers quitting that she allowed her party a free vote today to rule out No Deal — our final bargaining chip.

Meanwhile Tory Brexiteers who rejected the deal have lost the plot.We respect them for standing by Brexit, 17.4million voters and democracy. But how can they not grasp that Brexit is in mortal danger? They are vastly outnumbered by Remainers now hell-bent on imposing their will.

Some Remainers colluded with the EU. All have backed Brussels over Britain and now have the gall to lament the chaos they themselves have caused.Their stinking duplicity is only matched by Labour’s. Corbyn’s mob take the public for fools, posing as Leavers one minute, Remainers the next. Their sole concern is their party.How they whooped like excited kids as Mrs May’s defeat became clear. To them Britain’s grave plight is just a tribal game.

Then there’s the EU and its three-year campaign to humiliate and punish Britain, hoping to overturn our Leave vote. It has soured relations for a generation.No wonder Tories do not trust Brussels not to trap us in the backstop.

No one can predict what happens now.If the ERG get a third chance to back the deal they must take it. By then Brexit’s impending death should be very clear.

But no MP should be in any doubt how voters see them.Their stock was already low. Their conduct at this critical moment in our history has shamed Parliament.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:32 am

Jakubclaret wrote:Well prior to dismissing something out of hand perhaps the more sensible option would be to view first, to form a more grounded & accurate opinion to understand the facts.

Bit late to be asking for facts ain’t it ?
You should have thought of that 3 years ago.

Just seen Tommy Robinson in Waitrose buying 200 tins of soup....he’s waiting in the wings.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:34 am

Quoting any Murdoch publications automatically disqualifs you from any serious debate, please try again.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:48 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Rather than posting my own ramblings, this is the editorial from The Sun today. I agree with every word. I bet most of us do.

I think you mean ''I bet most leave voters do'.

Again it's a 'this is mainly remoaners and the EUs fault', although at least it gives a minor mention for the ERGs role in this. It fails to mention that the two years of negotiation have been led by Brexiteers, it fails to mention that the backstop was the UKs idea, not the EUs. It calims the EU have set out to humiliate us when all they've done is be entirely consistent in sticking to their red lines, specifically on a hard border in Ireland. It fails to mention that the Brexit the championed has always been a fantasy. But then that's a Murdoch paper for you, everything is everybody elses fault (which is largely how all this started), it's what sells papers.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:04 am

Greenmile wrote:So it should be easy to find me a credible source which says the Remain campaign “broke the law”. I’ll wait.

I've posted several links showing that remain broke the same rules as leave.
I doubt you have bothered to read them or have just outright ignored what they say because, and this goes back to my original comment, you base your entire opinions on the view of a small handful of like minded people

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:25 am

From that Sun editorial

“Mrs May’s deal isn’t great. But it would have got Brexit done, as a weary population desperately wants.”

Just think on that. This is what leave has come to.
All the promises, all the lies telling us how great it will be.
Now just this.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:28 am

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Oooo! I hope so, as an interested observer from a European country I'd love to see the repercussions of that from a safe distance.

However...

SPOILER

it won't happen, there'll be a second referendum and remain will win.

I'm pretty sure remain was nailed on to win last time.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:38 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I'm pretty sure remain was nailed on to win last time.

Stop living in the past all.

The Informed referendum will solve the problem which has gone on for far to long so the questions on the ballot paper will be the following two.

Is it in everyone’s interest to stay or leave the EU, simple as that.

If the vote goes to stay then we stay but instead of continuing to carp at every opportunity we take a “full and active” interest in the organisation.

If the vote is to leave I will East my hat, coat and suck my shoes to death, seriously Now we know that the useless politicians can’t work out how to leave by themselves the public certainly won’t want to risk all of this nonsense over again. So the vote will be a majority to stay in the EU.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:40 am

if you still back Brexit after that Sun editorial, then you'll be still backing Brexit whatever happens.

At least it give the ERG some ****, which makes a nice pleasant change but I for one am a bit sick of Brexiteers and their backers blaming everybody else for their mess.

They promised Zidane, and gave us Brian Laws.

SalisburyClaret · Post by **SalisburyClaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:43 am

Brian Laws signed Dean Marney

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:48 am

The Venn Diagram between people who think Brexit is a good idea and that Brian Laws was a good Burnley manager is a circle.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:48 am

SalisburyClaret wrote:Brian Laws signed Dean Marney

Best pro-Brexit post ever. Shame they didn't think to get that in the Sun editorial.

Oh well, maybe they can get it on the side of the brexit bus for the second referendum.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:51 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:The Venn Diagram between people who think Brexit is a good idea and that Brian Laws was a good Burnley manager is a circle.

The Venn diagram of people who understand what a Venn diagram is and who think Brexit is a good idea is two very distinct circles, about 20 miles apart

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:55 am

Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:57 am

Steve1956 wrote:Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

Best of 5 obvs

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:58 am

Steve1956 wrote:Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

Best of 5 quite simply, or until remain get what they want.

*Making this comment because I know it will annoy some remainers.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:59 am

South West Claret. wrote:Stop living in the past all.

The Informed referendum will solve the problem which has gone on for far to long so the questions on the ballot paper will be the following two.

Is it in everyone’s interest to stay or leave the EU, simple as that.

If the vote goes to stay then we stay but instead of continuing to carp at every opportunity we take a “full and active” interest in the organisation.

If the vote is to leave I will East my hat, coat and suck my shoes to death, seriously Now we know that the useless politicians can’t work out how to leave by themselves the public certainly won’t want to risk all of this nonsense over again. So the vote will be a majority to stay in the EU.

I think you should West your hat.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:59 am

Steve1956 wrote:Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

If we have another referendum we have to have a defined Leave option to vote on rather than just plain ‘Leave’. If that wins then it can happen fairly quickly (and I assume the option will have been discussed with the EU first and deemed deliverable).

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:03 am

If people have a better idea than a 2nd ref at this moment in time*

*of course, that does depend on whether you think a "No Deal" is a good idea or not.

The May deal is dead, which was the compromise.

So I'm saying to you Brexiteers, you've had your chance, you blew it.

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:04 am

martin_p wrote:If we have another referendum we have to have a defined Leave option to vote on rather than just plain ‘Leave’. If that wins then it can happen fairly quickly (and I assume the option will have been discussed with the EU first and deemed deliverable).

No we don't, you're just trying to further weight a vote that remain will already win.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:05 am

Surely having "No deal" on the referendum fulfills that?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:07 am

These tariffs look like really bad news for British farming and not so good for British manufacturing.

Quick glance suggests that the longer the "No Deal" goes on, the worse its going to get for quite a lot of sectors of the UK.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:08 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Surely having "No deal" on the referendum fulfills that?

Yes that counts. Having a referendum without understanding exactly what Leave means would be completely pointless and take the argument no further forward.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:09 am

Caballo wrote:No we don't, you're just trying to further weight a vote that remain will already win.

But Leave voters keep telling me that 'everyone knew what they were voting for' in the last referendum. If that's the case what's the problem with defining that as part of a 2nd referendum?

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:14 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Best of 5 quite simply, or until remain get what they want.

*Making this comment because I know it will annoy some remainers.

Doesn't annoy me, I actually agree, we should keep holding referendums until remain wins, even if we have to have twenty of them and ignore the results of nineteen.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:16 am

And it has to be said

- If the MPs vote for "No Deal" tonight, and its not what the majority wants, how is it democratic for it to still be the default option on March 29th?

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:30 am

Steve1956 wrote:Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

Well that's always been the best outcome from a political perspective. It basically puts the issue to bed. To use an old adage we will have measured twice and so we can then cut, even though we might bleed to death.
The big issue for MPs since 2016 has really been the balancing act between what we can practically achieve without making the country a lot worse off and damaging our international status versus the political ramifications of not carrying out the result of the referendum.
So far there is no agreement / majority for either argument. I have no sympathy for May, but this is the reality of the situation she inherited.
If leave were to win again, then this dilemma would basically be resolved. Politics would have to take precedent over any other consideration - even if it mean't the government having to take unpalatable economic decisions.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:40 am

martin_p wrote:But Leave voters keep telling me that 'everyone knew what they were voting for' in the last referendum. If that's the case what's the problem with defining that as part of a 2nd referendum?

And how the hell do you think leave would be defined?
By the remainer HOC? Its full of people that want May's twice failed deal v remain. Thr only fair way would be leave v remain and sub questions on how to leave.

I remain convinced that the quickest way to get a trade deal is to revoke now and then envoke again asap with a clear view of the the trade deal whanted. Imo a canada plus.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:44 am

Regarding the trade deal, we'd be desperate for one, and we'd get absolutely screwed by everybody.

Thats really a non-starter as an argument why we should just go.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:45 am

Just noticed with the tariffs.

You'll never believe which part of the Uk will be treated differently to the rest of the UK?

Yup, Northern Ireland.

I wonder what the DUP think about that?

SingaporeClarets · Post by **SingaporeClarets** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:47 am

Surely the European Union could have found someone other than a fraudster exMP to interview about Brexit on their official news channel. Not to mention the fact he admitted turning a blind eye to criminal gangs in his constituency.

https://twitter.com/DenisMacShane/statu ... 05633?s=19" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:47 am

summitclaret wrote:And how the hell do you think leave would be defined?
By the remainer HOC? Its full of people that want May's twice failed deal v remain. Thr only fair way would be leave v remain and sub questions on how to leave.
.

You've just answered your own question.
I've been posting this for months now:
Question 1. Do you wish to LEAVE the EU? YES or NO
Question 2. If the answer to 1. is "YES", place the following leave options in rank order*, (or some alternative kind of indicative vote to point the govt. in the correct direction).
* one option of course being "No Deal".

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:49 am

It's pointless arguing now as even some of the "The Little Englanders" are resigned to staying in after the farce of the last 2 1/2 years of nonsense from their divided MPs.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:50 am

And i have been saying it for months too.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:51 am

Steve1956 wrote:Just a question from a casual watcher,if we have another referendum and leave wins again...what happens then?

You'd expect an initial question of:
"Leave or Remain"

and then a secondary question of:
"If leave then do you want:
No deal
May's Deal
EEA"

or whatever.

It will put some meat on the bones of what Leave means. For instance it will finally show if there is really a mandate for No Deal (as some seem to believe)

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:53 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:If people have a better idea than a 2nd ref at this moment in time*

*of course, that does depend on whether you think a "No Deal" is a good idea or not.

The May deal is dead, which was the compromise.

So I'm saying to you Brexiteers, you've had your chance, you blew it.

How can anything be blown before it's even been done?

Leave was the vote result, have we left already?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:54 am

summitclaret wrote:And how the hell do you think leave would be defined?
By the remainer HOC? Its full of people that want May's twice failed deal v remain. Thr only fair way would be leave v remain and sub questions on how to leave.

I remain convinced that the quickest way to get a trade deal is to revoke now and then envoke again asap with a clear view of the the trade deal whanted. Imo a canada plus.

We need a consensus on Leave, something the government has never attempted to do. A series of indicative votes in the HoC to understand where MPs are would be a good start. The either come up with a single Leave option (agreed by the EU) or as you've suggested a number of options. But the May deal, having been voted down twice, shouldn't be one of the options. And when no deal is voted down this afternoon then to my mind that takes that off the table as a viable referendum option as well.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:54 am

summitclaret wrote:And i have been saying it for months too.

Good. So there's hope for compromise and a way forward that both leavers and remainers can agree on then.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:01 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:You will find if you read back, I have been supportive of a 2nd referendum and have been for some time.

Why, because having watched lots of programmes and speaking to loads of people, I don’t see the answer being different.

My only issue is I know the question on the next ref will be fully loaded towards remain, because that’s what the real people in power want.

There will only be a 2nd referendum if the powers that be can guarantee a soft brexit or remaining will carry the day,hence why they want the 2 leave options to be split,so remain can claim victory,if people want a 2nd vote fine,let's have whatever parliament agree on the ballot,and no-deal on the ballot,that way no-one can claim the public don't now what their voting for,don't assume parliament's ideas will win over the no-deal option given recent opinion polling.

Any 2nd vote that has remain as an option is a betrayal of the 2016 vote,and should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

And before anybody asks no i wouldn't have voted for May's farce of a WA.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:03 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Regarding the trade deal, we'd be desperate for one, and we'd get absolutely screwed by everybody.

Thats really a non-starter as an argument why we should just go.

Isn't that your main argument for May's deal? That we are so desperate for a trade deal that we should accept any terms the EU cares to give? I can't imagine how a different deal could be much worse.

With any third party country, including the EU if we ever get out, we can make mutual arrangements for a mutual trade deal of mutual benefit. A lot of people are looking at trade deals as if they are all in our favour and we need to pay a big price to get it. This is not correct. If you accept the views of free traders, the trade deals should benefit both parties.

The current free trade we have with the EU is of benefit to both sides; we all agree that. But the EU has decided that political considerations outweigh the financial considerations, so they won't accept a free trade deal unless it is wildly skewed in their favour.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:07 am

How can anything be blown before it's even been done?

Leave was the vote result, have we left already?

Because "No Deal" wasn't on the ballot paper.

Not going over old arguments Sidney, but leave said one thing before the referendum and once they had the votes, then said something different.

That is reality.