cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 14, 2018 15:44:50 GMT
Odd that Labour don't support May's deal -they want to remain more than the Tories -their Brexit position is ridiculous (wanting to negotiate on different grounds with the EU, which says negotiation is over, plus the only thing that matches their 6-point Brexit is staying in the EU)
Labour's 6-point Brexit is based on the deal David Davis said he would get. I agree that it is ridiculous. Certainly the one that says "exact same benefits"
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Dec 14, 2018 16:11:23 GMT
I note that Yougov's latest polling (see Peter Kellner's letter in the Times), has: Remain/May's Deal - 62/38 Remain/No Deal - 57/43 Remain/May's Deal/No Deal - 54/18/28 and we know how reliable the polling was last time around.......
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Dec 14, 2018 16:14:45 GMT
It baffles me why we are even negotiating with a illegitimate political institution. When the EU started life 1956 it was fundamentally a trading block which i have no problem with. But treaty after treaty they have slowly extended their tentacles in to countless areas that is far beyond their original remit. As well as this they have become insanely wealthy enabling them to bribe constituencies (through incentives) following unfavorable votes (google EU expenditure following votes against treaties) ie. allowing them to buy their own form of democracy.
The very fact that Brexit is so complicated is a reflection of how much of a power grab the EU have managed to get away with. I don't like the woman, but Thatcher saw this 30 years ago and the UK were too naive to see it.
I believe we should not have even abided the Article 50 nonsense. On the the 24th June 2016 we should have been out full stop. The UK government could have stepped in and underwrote transitional loans for any hardship in business. The EU would had to have come running to avoid serious collapse of European based financials with significant interest in London and i think the 'passporting' issue could have been solved in weeks by holding a gun to EU's head.
Had the EU not have come running i believe the vast majority of European based business who view the UK as a key market would have worked out how to conduct business with or without the EU, because ultimately what are the EU going to do roll the tanks on to the lawn, no.
Ironically we scored an own goal on the day after the referendum vote by dancing to EU's tune with Article 50, an article designed to make withdrawal as hard as possible and never really intended to ever be used. At the same time also ligatermising the EU itself.
For all the heartache and turmoil it's causing if we didn't do it now we never be able to leave.
|
|
|
Post by df on Dec 14, 2018 22:59:40 GMT
It baffles me why we are even negotiating with a illegitimate political institution. When the EU started life 1956 it was fundamentally a trading block which i have no problem with. But treaty after treaty they have slowly extended their tentacles in to countless areas that is far beyond their original remit. As well as this they have become insanely wealthy enabling them to bribe constituencies (through incentives) following unfavorable votes (google EU expenditure following votes against treaties) ie. allowing them to buy their own form of democracy. The very fact that Brexit is so complicated is a reflection of how much of a power grab the EU have managed to get away with. I don't like the woman, but Thatcher saw this 30 years ago and the UK were too naive to see it. I believe we should not have even abided the Article 50 nonsense. On the the 24th June 2016 we should have been out full stop. The UK government could have stepped in and underwrote transitional loans for any hardship in business. The EU would had to have come running to avoid serious collapse of European based financials with significant interest in London and i think the 'passporting' issue could have been solved in weeks by holding a gun to EU's head. Had the EU not have come running i believe the vast majority of European based business who view the UK as a key market would have worked out how to conduct business with or without the EU, because ultimately what are the EU going to do roll the tanks on to the lawn, no. Ironically we scored an own goal on the day after the referendum vote by dancing to EU's tune with Article 50, an article designed to make withdrawal as hard as possible and never really intended to ever be used. At the same time also ligatermising the EU itself. For all the heartache and turmoil it's causing if we didn't do it now we never be able to leave. I questioned EU sustainability in 2004 when the latest enlargement phase kicked in. It started to look like a tool for NATO expansion. It worried me that some fundamental principles (democracy and human rights) as well as economic stability of candidate states were waived. Started as a trading block and ended up as a political organisation feeding US expansion appetite for Eastern Europe. During the process, Turkey, Georgia and Ukraine were considered as future members.. not healthy in my view (too much greed is destructive as we know from history).
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Dec 15, 2018 9:26:43 GMT
I note that Yougov's latest polling (see Peter Kellner's letter in the Times), has: Remain/May's Deal - 62/38 Remain/No Deal - 57/43 Remain/May's Deal/No Deal - 54/18/28 and we know how reliable the polling was last time around....... Indeed we do know: they weren't bad given how close the result was. Mike Smithson, of Political Betting, calculated that of the 34 referendum campaign polls, 17 gave leads for Leave, 14 had Remain ahead and three suggested a dead heat. The polls are much more consistent for Remain now than they were pre-referendum, and by a larger margin.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 15, 2018 13:59:54 GMT
and we know how reliable the polling was last time around....... Indeed we do know: they weren't bad given how close the result was. Mike Smithson, of Political Betting, calculated that of the 34 referendum campaign polls, 17 gave leads for Leave, 14 had Remain ahead and three suggested a dead heat. The polls are much more consistent for Remain now than they were pre-referendum, and by a larger margin. Which party would be stupid enough to call a second referendum? -Tories, already in trouble, second referendum would be seen as treachery by their leave supporters, enough to stop them getting into office again -Labour, if in power, would hardly want to call a referendum, would prefer to push on with their Brexit strategy (assuming they have one)
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Dec 15, 2018 15:14:57 GMT
Indeed we do know: they weren't bad given how close the result was. Mike Smithson, of Political Betting, calculated that of the 34 referendum campaign polls, 17 gave leads for Leave, 14 had Remain ahead and three suggested a dead heat. The polls are much more consistent for Remain now than they were pre-referendum, and by a larger margin. Which party would be stupid enough to call a second referendum? -Tories, already in trouble, second referendum would be seen as treachery by their leave supporters, enough to stop them getting into office again -Labour, if in power, would hardly want to call a referendum, would prefer to push on with their Brexit strategy (assuming they have one)
Neither. Fortunately, neither party is now leading the issue, Parliament is.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,954
Likes: 4,386
|
Post by agent69 on Dec 15, 2018 16:22:26 GMT
Neither. Fortunately, neither party is now leading the issue, Parliament is. Parliament leading on the issue?
If only
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,451
Likes: 2,902
|
Post by michaelc on Dec 16, 2018 18:54:17 GMT
To address the the question of the thread I think the answer is "we don't know yet".
In pure democratic terms, if we leave the EU then the vote has been implemented. How and when we leave is supposed to be up to the politicians. No doubt many of the leavers have different views on the "how" but they weren't asked that and IMO should be broadly satisfied (at least not revolutionary!) if any EU departure is achieved.
One thing that has always troubled me is right across the media there has always seemed to be an assumption that most people voted for leave because of issues to do with immigration and assimilation. Perhaps there are polls that support that to some extent but we've seen time after time, polls being inaccurate of late. The reason I voted leave was entirely due to wider issues of what the EU is, where it is heading and being more concerned with the long term trajectory than the short term. I'd be surprised if I was the only one voting on those grounds and I certainly don't believe anywhere near a majority of the population are bigots as they are sometimes portrayed.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 17, 2018 8:21:50 GMT
The reason I voted leave was entirely due to wider issues of what the EU is, where it is heading and being more concerned with the long term trajectory than the short term. Agree with that. The EU's been around 60+ years and they haven't even achieved common currency across all countries, common foreign policy, sharing of debt, EU army etc. despite the promise of "ever closer union". The EU might be seen as a nice idea by some, but the different countries don't share a common view of the world, e.g. look what's happening with some of the eastern European countries and how they react to being told to take (Muslim) immigrants.
Far from being united, the EU's always been a way for France and Germany to dictate how Europe works, very much to the benefit of the German economy.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Dec 17, 2018 9:34:05 GMT
The reason I voted leave was entirely due to wider issues of what the EU is, where it is heading and being more concerned with the long term trajectory than the short term. Agree with that. The EU's been around 60+ years and they haven't even achieved common currency across all countries, common foreign policy, sharing of debt, EU army etc. despite the promise of "ever closer union". The EU might be seen as a nice idea by some, but the different countries don't share a common view of the world, e.g. look what's happening with some of the eastern European countries and how they react to being told to take (Muslim) immigrants.
Far from being united, the EU's always been a way for France and Germany to dictate how Europe works, very much to the benefit of the German economy.
UK economy benefited more than Germany's after we entered in 1973 - UK GDP per capita increased by 102%, Germany's by 99% and France's by 74% (1973-2015, data source The Conference Board Total Economy Database 2016)
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Dec 17, 2018 9:49:33 GMT
The reason I voted leave was entirely due to wider issues of what the EU is, where it is heading and being more concerned with the long term trajectory than the short term. Agree with that. The EU's been around 60+ years and they haven't even achieved common currency across all countries, common foreign policy, sharing of debt, EU army etc. despite the promise of "ever closer union". The EU might be seen as a nice idea by some, but the different countries don't share a common view of the world, e.g. look what's happening with some of the eastern European countries and how they react to being told to take (Muslim) immigrants.
Far from being united, the EU's always been a way for France and Germany to dictate how Europe works, very much to the benefit of the German economy.
The thing is, for many of us the EU wasn't a "they" it was a "we". And being part of it was the best way to moderate the domination of Europe by France and Germany you talk about. Apart from the economic issues, I voted Remain because I think our influence on the important matters on our continent and globally was much greater as part of the EU than outside it - we had two axes of influence from our two Unions. Now we'll have just one (if the UK survives) and we shall see how great a clout that gives us relative to the EU and other global powers in the long term.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 17, 2018 11:08:32 GMT
The reason I voted leave was entirely due to wider issues of what the EU is, where it is heading and being more concerned with the long term trajectory than the short term. Agree with that. The EU's been around 60+ years and they haven't even achieved common currency across all countries, common foreign policy, sharing of debt, EU army etc. despite the promise of "ever closer union". The EU might be seen as a nice idea by some, but the different countries don't share a common view of the world, e.g. look what's happening with some of the eastern European countries and how they react to being told to take (Muslim) immigrants.
Far from being united, the EU's always been a way for France and Germany to dictate how Europe works, very much to the benefit of the German economy.
I think one of you might be criticising the EU for moving towards 'ever closer union' and the other for failing to move towards ever closer union.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 17, 2018 12:18:06 GMT
Agree with that. The EU's been around 60+ years and they haven't even achieved common currency across all countries, common foreign policy, sharing of debt, EU army etc. despite the promise of "ever closer union". The EU might be seen as a nice idea by some, but the different countries don't share a common view of the world, e.g. look what's happening with some of the eastern European countries and how they react to being told to take (Muslim) immigrants.
Far from being united, the EU's always been a way for France and Germany to dictate how Europe works, very much to the benefit of the German economy.
I think one of you might be criticising the EU for moving towards 'ever closer union' and the other for failing to move towards ever closer union. Doesn't matter. People who are for/against the EU don't have to have common reasons why they like/dislike it.
I'm not against the idea of the EU, just the botched implementation (and I don't believe the EU will reform if we stay)
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 17, 2018 13:01:14 GMT
Personally I find the structures and democratic efficiency of the EU institutions deeply uninteresting and about as good as the British electoral system and parliament which really damn fine and quite as good as could be isn't it. But what effects my working life every day is the superlative efficiency of the Single Market with its seamless online logging and simplified procedures because product standards, labelling, handling, payments are the same from Estonia to Portugal. It is far more deeply integrated than any other inter country agreements across the world and to leave that in favour of the clunking craphole of the importing from outside the EU paperchase is crazy. What, we have to leave so we can stop EU immigrants and "control our borders"? We were fed a load of old about that Any problems on this front were of the British government's making. Under single market rules, it is permitted to chuck out anyone from another EU country who was not in full time employment six months after arrival in your country. The British simply did not implement this system. I know this as it is routine here in Belgium, and I have been helping a Dutch lady who has moved here to buy and start a farm, but has had delays in this since arriving and has been served deportation papers. It was more convenient for the Tories and their mouthpieces to shout about EU immigration for their own political ends than to admit that their own failure was at the root of the problem and it could be solved while remaining inside the single market. All the dreamed of new trade deals with India etc are going to involve huge concessions on immigration quotas by HMG. It was the first thing the Indian Government said! So, why leave the single market? Because one party was afraid of UKIP taking their votes and one former home secretary had had a bad time making her case at the ECJ that a man with a hook should be sent back to Jordan. Whoa! Censorship! I'm not allowed to say !
|
|