ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,846
|
Post by ozboy on Jan 24, 2019 19:19:59 GMT
No.
It's the stated direction of the EU ("ever closer union") that I object to, as I don't believe it has popular support across the whole of the EU. Also have a problem with the lack of democracy in how the EU runs. Before you/others leap on the second point saying it is democratic in your view, I'd need to see both points resolved before I change my mind.
The EU is a model of democracy compared to the disgraceful first past the post system used in the UK. Surely the mess on your own doorstep should concern you more. Secondly, I've lived in Germany, NL and Belgium these last 20 years, and I can honestly say that nobody is in the least concerned about the EU, has any opinion or ever talks about it. It is a particular British obsession. The common attitude to Brexit is that you have all gone insane. Arguably, when "compared to" the UK, but the EU is hardly a model of democracy?!! And I also note that you have neglected to mention what they think of the EU in Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal? Aware you are only commenting from having lived in the three countries you quote, but the opinions of the four countries I mention are well documented, and they certainly have rather strong opinions on the EU! So it is far from "a particular British obsession."
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 24, 2019 19:24:33 GMT
Does Brexit deliver the Electorate's vote?
The electorate voted for Liam Fox doing this: “We’re going to replicate the 40 EU free trade agreements that exist before we leave the European Union… believe me, we’ll have up to 40 ready for one second after midnight in March 2019.”
We have exactly zero so far. Leaving with no FTAs and no deal with the EU would be a clear betrayal of the electorate's vote.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 24, 2019 19:27:43 GMT
Does Brexit deliver the electorate's vote?
Liam Fox said the deal with the EU would be "the easiest deal in human history”
The deal was in fact the biggest defeat in Parliamentary history.
Leaving with no deal would betray the electorate's vote.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 24, 2019 19:30:06 GMT
Does Brexit deliver the electorate's vote?
"Take back Control" was the slogan.
May's deal gives control away to the EU: we cannot leave the backstop unless they agree.
May's deal would be a betrayal of the electorate's vote.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Jan 24, 2019 19:33:37 GMT
Leaving with no deal would betray the electorate's vote. I don't think so - Brexit could only ever be one of two things, leave with no deal, or move from a 1st division trading relationship with the EU to a 2nd division trading relationship with the EU. In the referendum campaign, the winning Leave campaign was not saying "Vote Leave to get a less good trading relationship with the EU!". They were effectively suggesting leaving with no deal. And it was all going to be really easy, as Dr. Fox said.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 19:34:05 GMT
ozboy I'd argue that that is precisely what the EU is, a model of democracy . Perfect? No, not by any means, but then nor is the UK's model of democracy. Or any other for that matter (though God knows the EU could at least have used the US constitution as an example, but even there it's far from perfect). As of now I think Spain and Portugal are rubbing along reasonably happily with the EU (as is Ireland, to complete the set of those most impacted by the financial crisis), though yes, Greece has much to complain about, and much to resolve internally. Italy is a different kettle of fish if only because the EU couldn't afford to bail it out. The combination of a populist government and straightened finances is a scary one - take note Corbyn supporters. You could also add in the Visegard group of Eastern European countries, and Germany who is unhappy with pretty much everybody else, and France, who on top of being unhappy with everybody else is also unhappy with itself. "Plus ca change" you might say.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 24, 2019 19:48:18 GMT
Leaving with no deal would betray the electorate's vote. I don't think so - Brexit could only ever be one of two things, leave with no deal, or move from a 1st division trading relationship with the EU to a 2nd division trading relationship with the EU. In the referendum campaign, the winning Leave campaign was not saying "Vote Leave to get a less good trading relationship with the EU!". They were effectively suggesting leaving with no deal. And it was all going to be really easy, as Dr. Fox said. I disagree with that. Very few if any were saying no deal until after the referendum. They were clearly saying we would get a good deal, indeed pretending they could get a "cake and eat it" deal without having to make trade-offs. I remain of the view that leaving with no deal betrays what the electorate voted for. Consistent with that, there's nearly a 20 point lead for Remain over No-deal in polls.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 19:58:17 GMT
As a matter of interest, if I wanted an honest and impartial assessment of the likely effects of no deal where should I look? I'd suggest the last two years' editions of The Economist. I know people will disagree with that but I think I'm right in saying they have no vested interest one way or the other. I agree though, validated sources and data in this discussion (not this thread, but nationally) are in pretty short supply .
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 24, 2019 20:08:42 GMT
As a matter of interest, if I wanted an honest and impartial assessment of the likely effects of no deal where should I look? I'd suggest the last two years' editions of The Economist. I know people will disagree with that but I think I'm right in saying they have no vested interest one way or the other. I agree though, validated sources and data in this discussion (not this thread, but nationally) are in pretty short supply . They have a vested interest in common sense, which is in very short supply in Westminster.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Jan 25, 2019 9:18:23 GMT
No.
It's the stated direction of the EU ("ever closer union") that I object to, as I don't believe it has popular support across the whole of the EU. Also have a problem with the lack of democracy in how the EU runs. Before you/others leap on the second point saying it is democratic in your view, I'd need to see both points resolved before I change my mind.
"Ever closer union" was an objective once stated, but there have been no moves towards anything like it for years now. That and a vague assertion that the EU "lacks democracy" is sufficient grounds to vote for long term damage to your country's economy? If we do end up significantly worse off, it's going to be down to parliament's inability to negotiate and especially due to the EU trying to punish us. Neither are reasons to stay.
Scenario is somewhat similar to an unhappy marriage. If one partner tells their closest friend "I've been unhappy for some time and I don't see it getting better in future, I'm going to ask for a divorce". Does the friend say "but you'll almost certainly be worse off, e.g. you'll be in a much smaller property, you should think of your lifestyle and stay married, albeit unhappily"? For me, life's about more than money.
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 1,252
|
Post by james100 on Jan 25, 2019 10:41:12 GMT
As a matter of interest, if I wanted an honest and impartial assessment of the likely effects of no deal where should I look? I'd suggest the last two years' editions of The Economist. I know people will disagree with that but I think I'm right in saying they have no vested interest one way or the other. I agree though, validated sources and data in this discussion (not this thread, but nationally) are in pretty short supply . This is also probably of interest. Published in December "The survey was conducted between 22 October and 29 November 2018. Responses were received from 369 companies, employing over 663,000 people, and accounting for around £124bn of turnover. Responses have been weighted by employment. For whole economy results, responses have been weighted by industry shares of employment." www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/agents-summary/2018/agents-survey-on-preparations-for-brexit.pdf?la=en&hash=324271D16C865323C2553573957F5A0EC4C2BDA3Edit: the BoE has produced a plethora of reports which, read in conjunction with the government trade data gives, dare I say it, a pretty obvious data-based view.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 25, 2019 12:20:52 GMT
But here's the rub, the UK government has already agreed that there will be no hard border. And until a solution (let's call it BoJo's technical one just for the sake of argument) the backstop will be in place. Hence impasse. I agree it's a problem. Even if May's deal gets through, I suspect the EU will use it again in trade negotiations, e.g. "give us access to all of your fishing grounds and keep your own fishing boats in port or there'll be no agreement and we'll have to have a hard border (and violence will kick off again)". Too close to blackmail. UK should ignore it.
On the subject of no deal - I understand why (most) people want to avoid no deal, but simply suggesting that no deal be removed as a default is only half of the story. If people don't want no deal as the default, they need to replace it with something else. I suspect a lot of the people pressing for removal of no deal want Remain as the default, but don't have the honesty to come out and say so. Remain should be the default - the status quo - until something better is agreed upon. A no deal crashout should not be the default. The electorate did not approve that in the referendum. So sure, agree something better (a harder or softer Brexit, depending on your bent, with or without a final referendum to ratify the terms) but some sort of delay or withdrawal of A50 is much better than a crashout Brexit. That's common sense, not ideology, or ( ) "remoaning".
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 25, 2019 12:24:56 GMT
I didn't say it was impossible. But if you want no border from the UK side that's no customs checks, that's zero tariffs, and that has to be applied to all other countries under WTO (and yes another country WILL complain) and that's further devastation to the economy (especially agriculture and manufacturing). A brave choice for the government to make. And if we have given free trade to all other countries - um - where is our leverage to negotiate FTAs? And then there's what the EU would do after a no deal exit, over which we have zero control. It IS a problem, and no deal advocates choose to ignore it with sophistry.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Jan 25, 2019 12:44:02 GMT
I agree it's a problem. Even if May's deal gets through, I suspect the EU will use it again in trade negotiations, e.g. "give us access to all of your fishing grounds and keep your own fishing boats in port or there'll be no agreement and we'll have to have a hard border (and violence will kick off again)". Too close to blackmail. UK should ignore it.
On the subject of no deal - I understand why (most) people want to avoid no deal, but simply suggesting that no deal be removed as a default is only half of the story. If people don't want no deal as the default, they need to replace it with something else. I suspect a lot of the people pressing for removal of no deal want Remain as the default, but don't have the honesty to come out and say so. Remain should be the default - the status quo - until something better is agreed upon. As the HoC has a huge Remain majority, they'd just say "we're not going to work to agree 'something better', we'll just remain".
I'd be in favour of a General Election. Would force the parties to say where they stand on Brexit and would clear out a good few MPs who are out-of-synch with their electorate.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 25, 2019 12:49:01 GMT
Remain should be the default - the status quo - until something better is agreed upon. Problem with that is that the HoC has a huge Remain majority, so they'd just say "job done, we're not going to work to agree 'something better', we'll just remain".
I'd be in favour of a General Election. Would force the parties to say where they stand on Brexit and would clear out a good few MPs who are out-of-synch with their electorate.
If that happened and the electorate was unhappy, they'd pay the price at the ballot box. I'd be happier with a GE if the electoral system was better, but I think we agree on that issue.
|
|