UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[Inverted]

11 hours ago, Kitchen Sales said:

Misjudgements are not lies. 

It is also worth noting that the EU's own research has forecast Ireland will lose a larger percentage of its workforce than any other country, UK included, if there is no deal. If that was to come true then how can Varadkar and the EU explain to the Irish public that businesses and jobs are lost simply because they lacked the imagination to solve differences.

At the end of the day some aren't going to get what they want. Everyone can't be pleased.

No, but if anyone is going to be pleased it's not going to be us. Ireland is naturally most vulnerable, being a small country trapped with us as their obvious main trading partner. The mere fact of us inflicting a major economic shock on ourselves is enough to hurt Ireland.

A hard border would obviously do even more damage, but that simply won't happen. The EU are dead set on Ireland as a whole remaining aligned. Unless we break off in a no-deal situation, the EU just will not allow a hard border. 

And the leadership in England has also said that they don't want a hard border - Johnson even went so far as to say that if we broke off without an agreement on a border, we just wouldn't enforce it, and then it would the Irish's fault if they decided to police it (which is obviously a mental idea). In fact we would already have agreed to the EUs demands if not for 10 insane MPs who don't want any difference between NI and Britain unless it's on abortion or gays' rights. 

Ireland is economically hurting because they border one country, and that country is a major economy, and that country is hamstringing itself economically. The EU, in insisting on regulatory alignment between the North and the Republic, is at least working to minimise the damage to Ireland.

Thats what the EU is: a small, isolated country like Ireland becomes the more powerful negotiating power vs a major power like the UK because it has the largest economic bloc in the world acting in its interest. 

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

No, but if anyone is going to be pleased it's not going to be us. Ireland is naturally most vulnerable, being a small country trapped with us as their obvious main trading partner. The mere fact of us inflicting a major economic shock on ourselves is enough to hurt Ireland.

A hard border would obviously do even more damage, but that simply won't happen. The EU are dead set on Ireland as a whole remaining aligned. Unless we break off in a no-deal situation, the EU just will not allow a hard border. 

And the leadership in England has also said that they don't want a hard border - Johnson even went so far as to say that if we broke off without an agreement on a border, we just wouldn't enforce it, and then it would the Irish's fault if they decided to police it (which is obviously a mental idea). In fact we would already have agreed to the EUs demands if not for 10 insane MPs who don't want any difference between NI and Britain unless it's on abortion or gays' rights. 

Ireland is economically hurting because they border one country, and that country is a major economy, and that country is hamstringing itself economically. The EU, in insisting on regulatory alignment between the North and the Republic, is at least working to minimise the damage to Ireland.

Thats what the EU is: a small, isolated country like Ireland becomes the more powerful negotiating power vs a major power like the UK because it has the largest economic bloc in the world acting in its interest. 

 

It's not a hard border that Varadkar doesn't want, it is any border, which is something very different. The DUP aren't being insane, they are unionists and from a unionist viewpoint they see this as pivoting Northern Ireland towards the Republic and away from the UK. You can't really argue with their position on that, it is fairly evident that is what it would do. Brexit ends the status quo and so Northern Ireland is going to pivot one way or the other. 

Keeping Northern Ireland in the customs union but the rUK not is economically odd. Northern Ireland would not receive any of the benefits of UK central government policy, at best Belfast would perhaps have to try and make itself a hub for businesses who want UK law but friction-less EU trade. Who knows what the demand for that is.

[Inverted]

28 minutes ago, Kitchen Sales said:

 

It's not a hard border that Varadkar doesn't want, it is any border, which is something very different. The DUP aren't being insane, they are unionists and from a unionist viewpoint they see this as pivoting Northern Ireland towards the Republic and away from the UK. You can't really argue with their position on that, it is fairly evident that is what it would do. Brexit ends the status quo and so Northern Ireland is going to pivot one way or the other. 

Keeping Northern Ireland in the customs union but the rUK not is economically odd. Northern Ireland would not receive any of the benefits of UK central government policy, at best Belfast would perhaps have to try and make itself a hub for businesses who want UK law but friction-less EU trade. Who knows what the demand for that is.

I'd imagine there would be some interest. And in any case the existing arrangement with NI is proving increasingly unworkable, to the point where devolved gov has failed entirely and we're basically needing to govern them without Stormont. NI could do with a change, but the DUP are so ideologically stubborn that they would rather a massively increased economic blow on NI, than any sign of increasing cooperation with Dublin. Maybe the fact that economic shock of a hard border would be hardest felt by the generally non-DUP supporting areas in the south and west of Ulster, idk. I could imagine Foster being the type willing to hurt herself a little to hurt someone else a lot. 

And I can argue with their position, and I do call them crazy because I think blocking perfectly reasonable proposals, which would ease the hardships faced by both sides, on the grounds of nationalist paranoia, is not a sound position. 

[Honey Honey]

43 minutes ago, Inverted said:

I'd imagine there would be some interest. And in any case the existing arrangement with NI is proving increasingly unworkable, to the point where devolved gov has failed entirely and we're basically needing to govern them without Stormont. NI could do with a change, but the DUP are so ideologically stubborn that they would rather a massively increased economic blow on NI, than any sign of increasing cooperation with Dublin. Maybe the fact that economic shock of a hard border would be hardest felt by the generally non-DUP supporting areas in the south and west of Ulster, idk. I could imagine Foster being the type willing to hurt herself a little to hurt someone else a lot. 

And I can argue with their position, and I do call them crazy because I think blocking perfectly reasonable proposals, which would ease the hardships faced by both sides, on the grounds of nationalist paranoia, is not a sound position. 

What hardships? This is just administrative task addons for the continuation of trade. It can be done in many different ways. The proposals were certainly unimaginative and deliberately politically debilitating in design. 

[Inverted]

12 minutes ago, Kitchen Sales said:

What hardships? This is just administrative task addons for the continuation of trade. It can be done in many different ways. The proposals were certainly unimaginative and deliberately politically debilitating in design. 

"Administrative task addons" sound innocuous enough, but delays and increased regulatory demands are two of the big increases in supply chain costs. To go backwards from a totally seamless border is a major adjustment, and it would hit the NI agricultural industry heavily - and that industry is, as far as I know, one of the few productive spots in the otherwise-grim Northern Irish economy these days.  

The EU is offering a way of minimising these obstacles, that requires basically no effort from NI, and so far the only justification anyone has found for blocking it is purely ideological. 

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

"Administrative task addons" sound innocuous enough, but delays and increased regulatory demands are two of the big increases in supply chain costs. To go backwards from a totally seamless border is a major adjustment, and it would hit the NI agricultural industry heavily - and that industry is, as far as I know, one of the few productive spots in the otherwise-grim Northern Irish economy these days.  

The EU is offering a way of minimising these obstacles, that requires basically no effort from NI, and so far the only justification anyone has found for blocking it is purely ideological. 

The proposal increases obstacles for other industries by creating barriers for them to the rUK market. It is a completely lazy uncompromising approach. It is all as if they can't really be bothered to sort out what better needs a land border and what needs a sea border, what needs to converge and what can diverge (which is what will happen in the trade deal). All just fuck it, here you go EU have Northern Ireland in all but name just hurry up and get to the trade talks. Remarkable by May. Lets face it, Westminster really hasn't given a shit about Northern Ireland since the shipyards closed, it can't be arsed, it wants rid, but they can't shake these Rangers fans off. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

So there's been some sort of deal announced. Looks like we'll be paying tens of billions to leave the world's largest free trade area, while surrendering the rights to define it's rights and regulations, though we will continue to abide by these rights and regulations. Expensive price to be pay to be an EU vassal state. Well played Brexiters, well played.

[RandoEFC+]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

So there's been some sort of deal announced. Looks like we'll be paying tens of billions to leave the world's largest free trade area, while surrendering the rights to define it's rights and regulations, though we will continue to abide by these rights and regulations. Expensive price to be pay to be an EU vassal state. Well played Brexiters, well played.

Don't give such a one sided view. Once we've paid £35-39 billion to leave we'll have SO MUCH MORE MONEY to put into housing, schools and the NHS. 

 

 

 

 

 

[God is Haaland]

 

 

[Honey Honey]

You two do realise the bill is for the spending we signed off on before Brexit and will be paid as and when those programmes come up right? 

Only a cunt wouldn't pay that. Very strange thing to be complaining about, but if your only conception of Brexit is what the Trumpsters like Farage say then I can see how you'd fall into the trap of thinking it's a bad thing.

 

[Inverted]

29 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Don't give such a one sided view. Once we've paid £35-39 billion to leave we'll have SO MUCH MORE MONEY to put into housing, schools and the NHS. 

 

 

 

 

 

I think that figure would account for roughly 4 years worth of our net contribution.

The questions to ask are: after 4 years, how many billion of pounds of growth will we have potentially lost thanks to Brexit? How much less valuable will our pounds be than they otherwise would have been?

Even dismissing all of that, and accepting that our budget will be greater in 4 years than it would have been if Brexit had never happened, what are the odds of the government at that time actually using it to improve the lives of regular British people? Even within the EU, there has been a lot that the Tories could have done, and instead they have actively strangled the NHS and fucked up welfare with Universal Credit in the name of an austerity policy which they have now admitted was basically pointless.

How can anyone think that that potential gain in our budget, even if we were to accept that it will exist, is going to go to us?

That's not how Britain works.

Edited December 8, 2017 by Inverted

[RandoEFC+]

15 minutes ago, Kitchen Sales said:

You two do realise the bill is for the spending we signed off on before Brexit and will be paid as and when those programmes come up right? 

Only a cunt wouldn't pay that. Very strange thing to be complaining about, but if your only conception of Brexit is what the Trumpsters like Farage say then I can see how you'd fall into the trap of thinking it's a bad thing.

 

You're correct, my gripe is that

a) this is a sharp wake up call for Brexiteers who churn out tripe like "why should we have to pay to leave?" and "if we have to pay that much to leave we just shouldn't make a deal with them". This was always going to happen and the number of Leave voters who ever thought paying a significant bill was ever going to be avoidable is further evidence of people having no idea what they were voting for.

And b) Theresa May trying to sell it as an opportunity for us to spend more money on welfare, education and the health service in the same sentence as admitting we'll be paying all this money to the EU without seeing the benefits of being in the EU in return.

[God is Haaland]

Stop arguing and watch my video, you tools.

[Inverted]

4 minutes ago, BartraPique1932 said:

Stop arguing and watch my video, you tools.

Pointless, it's impossible to make the DUP look more ridiculous than they already do.

[Honey Honey]

Just now, RandoEFC said:

You're correct, my gripe is that

a) this is a sharp wake up call for Brexiteers who churn out tripe like "why should we have to pay to leave?" and "if we have to pay that much to leave we just shouldn't make a deal with them". This was always going to happen and the number of Leave voters who ever thought paying a significant bill was ever going to be avoidable is further evidence of people having no idea what they were voting for.

And b) Theresa May trying to sell it as an opportunity for us to spend more money on welfare, education and the health service in the same sentence as admitting we'll be paying all this money to the EU without seeing the benefits of being in the EU in return.

Not true that it was always going to happen. It's a choice. Hence why Farage is having an utter meltdown.

Brexit didn't stipulate the how, that is why it won, it allowed a broad church to come together, its flaw is that it was done via a constitutional referendum and not via a singular political party, it is thus for the post Brexit government to juggle the split and be judged at the ballot box for whatever they deliver. You say it is a sharp wake up call for certain people but if it was that would be happening, instead pretty much everyone is trying to bring Theresa May down for her choices in order to do it the way they want, including to remain. I've found my first respect for her just by watching everyone universally lose their heads 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Kitchen Sales said:

You two do realise the bill is for the spending we signed off on before Brexit and will be paid as and when those programmes come up right? 

Only a cunt wouldn't pay that. Very strange thing to be complaining about, but if your only conception of Brexit is what the Trumpsters like Farage say then I can see how you'd fall into the trap of thinking it's a bad thing.

 

Don't see what the point in exiting is if we're going to still be subject to EU rules and regulations AND have no say in what those rules and regulations are. That doesn't assert Britain's sovereignty, it merely takes power away from Britain.

[God is Haaland]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

Pointless, it's impossible to make the DUP look more ridiculous than they already do.

Hold my beer.

[Honey Honey]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Don't see what the point in exiting is if we're going to still be subject to EU rules and regulations AND have no say in what those rules and regulations are. That doesn't assert Britain's sovereignty, it merely takes power away from Britain.

That is a danger but we still can't assert that to be true yet because they haven't started on the framework stage let alone the actual trade deal. What we mainly have are a lot of contradictory semantics, a lot of fudge that makes little sense in full. For that reason it stillp leaves open enough of the possibility of an agreement that expands sovereign safe guards and decentralisation during stages two and three. 

The only certainty from round one is the removal of the three threats made by Trumpsters, firstly the threat of bankrupting the EU, secondly no deal threat and thirdly the threat of deregulation undercutting. The EU has successfully made the UK remove these threats in exchange for negotiating the framework of a future deal. That seems a fair enough process to have happened. Not that the loudest voices in Britain (continuity remain and the Trumpsters) would ever want you to consider.

The dereg fanboys want no deal WTO because they know full well that if they don't prove that we don't need the single market via surviving without a trade deal then they won't get maximum regulatory sovereignty to deregulate. That is now off the table, so it's probably fair enough that they are kicking and screaming in their high chairs.

[6666]

We're getting blue passports boys! It doesn't allow us to do as much but the symbolism of backward minded, xenophobia led nationalism is amazing!

[The Artful Dodger]

I hope we don’t have to get new ones until they run out, just spent a wedge on one.

[Bluebird Hewitt]

3 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

I hope we don’t have to get new ones until they run out, just spent a wedge on one.

The current ones we have are fine and we get the blue one when it expires.

[Kowabunga]

I CAME

Edited February 27, 2018 by Kowabunga

[God is Haaland]

The maxfac customs system is going to cost between 17 and 20 billion GBP a year.

hf

[Guest]

On 05/12/2017 at 02:02, Kitchen Sales said:

Sorry but we've know what the government's plan is since Autumn 2016. Does anyone bother to listen or are you all still trapped in the prism of the referendum hysteria?

The referendum was a really simple straight forward result in which people voted to take back control of borders, laws and money, things signed away under European treaties. There are myriad ways to do this, it isn't just leave or remain. Isn't it funny that Neil Kinnock's son is the one who recognises that more than most in the Labour party?

For those in the here and now the only mistake right now can be the particular hand declared, chosen by those in the political elite to answer the referendum result, in this case the one May declared in Autumn 2016. Her government is now dependent on it to both happen and work, there will be electoral consequences if not.

Let us not forget however that you lot, myself included, all knew what the plan was going into the 2017 election (you have no excuse not to) and voted for a Labour manifesto that had already been rejected by the EU. The impasse we are now at is the same as had Corbyn been in power and true to his word.

Also, many in the financial sector consider John McDonnell a bigger threat to economic stability than Brexit. You don't have to be a right wing CityAM financier to recognise why either. It is hypocritical to support the current labour party whilst simulateonesly panicking about people voting for an uncertain economic future. That is a hypocrisy that some are going to have to address.

A UKIP based Brexit like Fairy supports can't get through parliament, never could, never will. Those people were always going to be disappointed. What has happened since the referendum is a coalition between the UKIP type Tories and the unimaginative auto-pilot remain Tories. That is why we have the hand May has chosen to play. It didn't have to be that hand but it is one that emerged in the environment. Labour and the political commentators need to self reflect on their role in creating that environment as well.

Did you vote leave or remain mate?

[Fairy In Boots]

So I was reading about Italy earlier 😂. Another great reason we voted out well done all those with a pair who stood up to the imperialists in Brussels. 

Hopefully they’ve just put the nail in the coffin of Italian membership, forza italia onwards to freedom