Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 13:53:08 GMT
All true. So why are the Government incapable of commanding a majority within their own ranks? I would suggest because they have become aware of the consequences, some of which I have already laid out. The only group in Parliament that would leave with no deal regardless is the group led by Reese-Mogg. And that is pure ideology. This is chaos. It could be argued that the EU have no intention of negotiating a deal. Maybe, the best solution is to leave with No Deal and not pay the 39 Billion. Personally, I think big business will then force the politicians to reach agreements. At the moment, there is no pressure on the EU to reach any agreement. But this half in - half out measure suggested by May is just wrong. That I think that is a valid argument. Not quite sure what the electorate would make of a deal dominated by the needs of business though. My impression is that business quite likes frictionless borders, quite likes free movement of capital and labour. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 17, 2018 13:59:04 GMT
The difference was around 1.3m, so it would only take a small number to have changed their minds for the opposite result. Probably something like the population of Leeds deciding the future of the whole country. Using your same argument, it would only take a small number to increase the Leave majority ? Just because the result was close, it doesn't change anything. We are where we are. The last General Election was close. Should we have re-run it? The last Grand National was close. Should we have re-run it? Lots of games in the World Cup were close. Some decided on the opinion of one man, the ref. Should we re-play those games? There was a vote in the HoC last night. I think it was 304-301. That was close. Should they vote again? Of course not. The rules for all these things are laid out beforehand. In life, you get winners and losers, and it's the same in elections/referendums. Not sure where I said we should rerun it, I was merely pointing out that it was close. I was responding to your reference to constituency voting implying an overwhelming majority. During the original debate in 2016 you questioned if a 60/40 majority either way would be enough of a mandate to bring this to a conclusion. It wasn't even that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 14:17:10 GMT
Wouldn't it have been so much easier and nicer if things had stopped at the Common Market?
|
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Ultra on Jul 17, 2018 19:03:19 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 19:49:40 GMT
Wouldn't it have been so much easier and nicer if things had stopped at the Common Market? It's the gradual and relentless intrusion in to our day to day lives that led to such anti-EU sentiment. If it had just stayed as a trading market then we would never have had a referendum. We should have opted out many years ago when they started to impose laws and regulations upon us. Most of the last few pages and recent general debate have been around the trade side of things, obviously this is massively important but only one element. So many people are fed up with our own courts not being able to conclude criminal cases without then being undermined by the European Courts of Justice. The mad inability to have any control over our borders - this doesn't mean we let nobody in but allowing us to be selective like most other countries around the world. If a European citizen has skills that are in short supply then they should be welcomed, the same as anyone from outside the EU such as the tens of thousands of medical professions from Africa, Asia and the Far East in the NHS We should't have a situation where individuals with serious criminal convictions can just waltz in unchecked. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jul 17, 2018 20:18:08 GMT
So if the UK stance on leaving is to retain the legislation on the rights of workers, controls over food and drug regulations , allow movement between borders, keep tariff-free trade in place, and continue to contribute to the EU budget, but lose the right to alter any future decisions, what exactly is the point of leaving?
If all those things were so bad that they forced us to the point that we felt we had to leave, why are they still being retained?
Better ask Nigel Farage that one,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 20:37:40 GMT
Wouldn't it have been so much easier and nicer if things had stopped at the Common Market? It's the gradual and relentless intrusion in to our day to day lives that led to such anti-EU sentiment. If it had just stayed as a trading market then we would never have had a referendum. We should have opted out many years ago when they started to impose laws and regulations upon us. Most of the last few pages and recent general debate have been around the trade side of things, obviously this is massively important but only one element. So many people are fed up with our own courts not being able to conclude criminal cases without then being undermined by the European Courts of Justice. The mad inability to have any control over our borders - this doesn't mean we let nobody in but allowing us to be selective like most other countries around the world. If a European citizen has skills that are in short supply then they should be welcomed, the same as anyone from outside the EU such as the tens of thousands of medical professions from Africa, Asia and the Far East in the NHS We should't have a situation where individuals with serious criminal convictions can just waltz in unchecked. So you concede the trade argument but then proceed to make huge generalizations. Your opinion as you have said previously. Could you name one case where our courts have found a defendant of a crime, not civil but criminal, which has then been overturned by the ECJ. As far as border control goes, how do you account for the 100,000s of non EU nationals that have become resident here? They are not covered by the free movement treaty and we have control. Why wee they allow3d to stay? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 22:02:40 GMT
It's the gradual and relentless intrusion in to our day to day lives that led to such anti-EU sentiment. If it had just stayed as a trading market then we would never have had a referendum. We should have opted out many years ago when they started to impose laws and regulations upon us. Most of the last few pages and recent general debate have been around the trade side of things, obviously this is massively important but only one element. So many people are fed up with our own courts not being able to conclude criminal cases without then being undermined by the European Courts of Justice. The mad inability to have any control over our borders - this doesn't mean we let nobody in but allowing us to be selective like most other countries around the world. If a European citizen has skills that are in short supply then they should be welcomed, the same as anyone from outside the EU such as the tens of thousands of medical professions from Africa, Asia and the Far East in the NHS We should't have a situation where individuals with serious criminal convictions can just waltz in unchecked. So you concede the trade argument but then proceed to make huge generalizations. Your opinion as you have said previously. Could you name one case where our courts have found a defendant of a crime, not civil but criminal, which has then been overturned by the ECJ. As far as border control goes, how do you account for the 100,000s of non EU nationals that have become resident here? They are not covered by the free movement treaty and we have control. Why wee they allow3d to stay? There have been hundreds of cases where foreign criminals and terrorists have successfully appealed deportation at the European courts. Off the top of my head I recall the remaining survivor of the embassy siege winning the right to stay in the UK where he now lives in much sought after social housing and picking up a nice benefit cheque every week. if the EU was just a trading group then I would happily have stayed in it, however, it's not worth all the other sh** we have to put up with to remain part of the club. Nothing short of blackmail IMO. i don't really care how many foreign nationals reside here, whether from the EU or elsewhere, as long as we have the ability to set rules on who can and cannot come in. If whichever government is in place at any time are lax on administering those rules that is a different matter. It's the principle of being able to make our own decisions that is important to me. |
|
|
|
Post by jaggas on Jul 17, 2018 22:24:44 GMT
Your fear of change is clouding your judgement. Open your mind and be positive. To even suggest that the UK cannot 'work' without the EU is just defeatist. While we are in the EU, we are being blocked from expanding our current trade. If negotiated, who is to say that we cannot get even better trade deals than the EU negotiate? Just applying logic Nobby. Those deals are in place negotiated by the largest trading bloc (in economic terms). What are the chances we can do a better deal with tge size of our stand alone economy? And how long would it take? Trade deals are notoriously tortuous to negotiate. We crash out without having the benefits of the current agreements it might take 2-3 years to get one deal with one country. It's a disaster. I laughed when Boris Johnson recently showed off about the growth of exports to South Korea over the last year (most current trading year). What he forgot, or didn't know, was that result was because of the new trade deal negotiated by the EU which we benifitted from. That's all well and good but we dont benefit from all the trade deals the EU does on our behalf because what may benefit us may not benefit Estonia, Latvia or Spain.All our economies are different as are interest rates and inflation I notice you mentioned the free trade deal the EU did with Japan.Tell me do Japan now have to accept free movement of EU citizens and pay them state benefits provide them with free healthcare education and housing? Are Japan now expected to subsidise 26 nations who dont contribute? Have Japan been forced to let boats from Holland fish in their waters until the fish are bordering on extinction? Do Japanese people now have to buy crap light bulbs that are not fit for purpose?? Is the yen to be scrapped and replaced with the Euro?? I doubt Japan would accept any of those ridiculous rules and laws and pay more than 26 nations for the privilege. The deal Japan has just got would suit us just fine.A free trade deal without all the baggage while subsidising scrounging nations. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 17, 2018 23:29:01 GMT
So you concede the trade argument but then proceed to make huge generalizations. Your opinion as you have said previously. Could you name one case where our courts have found a defendant of a crime, not civil but criminal, which has then been overturned by the ECJ. As far as border control goes, how do you account for the 100,000s of non EU nationals that have become resident here? They are not covered by the free movement treaty and we have control. Why wee they allow3d to stay? There have been hundreds of cases where foreign criminals and terrorists have successfully appealed deportation at the European courts. Off the top of my head I recall the remaining survivor of the embassy siege winning the right to stay in the UK where he now lives in much sought after social housing and picking up a nice benefit cheque every week. if the EU was just a trading group then I would happily have stayed in it, however, it's not worth all the other sh** we have to put up with to remain part of the club. Nothing short of blackmail IMO. i don't really care how many foreign nationals reside here, whether from the EU or elsewhere, as long as we have the ability to set rules on who can and cannot come in. If whichever government is in place at any time are lax on administering those rules that is a different matter. It's the principle of being able to make our own decisions that is important to me. I think you have just proved Oldie's point. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 17, 2018 23:30:39 GMT
So if the UK stance on leaving is to retain the legislation on the rights of workers, controls over food and drug regulations , allow movement between borders, keep tariff-free trade in place, and continue to contribute to the EU budget, but lose the right to alter any future decisions, what exactly is the point of leaving? If all those things were so bad that they forced us to the point that we felt we had to leave, why are they still being retained? Better ask Nigel Farage that one, Which is what We were both trying to get across two years ago. As for Nigel, he's off fishing for protected species isn't he? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 6:47:31 GMT
There have been hundreds of cases where foreign criminals and terrorists have successfully appealed deportation at the European courts. Off the top of my head I recall the remaining survivor of the embassy siege winning the right to stay in the UK where he now lives in much sought after social housing and picking up a nice benefit cheque every week. if the EU was just a trading group then I would happily have stayed in it, however, it's not worth all the other sh** we have to put up with to remain part of the club. Nothing short of blackmail IMO. i don't really care how many foreign nationals reside here, whether from the EU or elsewhere, as long as we have the ability to set rules on who can and cannot come in. If whichever government is in place at any time are lax on administering those rules that is a different matter. It's the principle of being able to make our own decisions that is important to me. I think you have just proved Oldie's point. Precisely |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 6:59:06 GMT
Just applying logic Nobby. Those deals are in place negotiated by the largest trading bloc (in economic terms). What are the chances we can do a better deal with tge size of our stand alone economy? And how long would it take? Trade deals are notoriously tortuous to negotiate. We crash out without having the benefits of the current agreements it might take 2-3 years to get one deal with one country. It's a disaster. I laughed when Boris Johnson recently showed off about the growth of exports to South Korea over the last year (most current trading year). What he forgot, or didn't know, was that result was because of the new trade deal negotiated by the EU which we benifitted from. That's all well and good but we dont benefit from all the trade deals the EU does on our behalf because what may benefit us may not benefit Estonia, Latvia or Spain.All our economies are different as are interest rates and inflation I notice you mentioned the free trade deal the EU did with Japan.Tell me do Japan now have to accept free movement of EU citizens and pay them state benefits provide them with free healthcare education and housing? Are Japan now expected to subsidise 26 nations who dont contribute? Have Japan been forced to let boats from Holland fish in their waters until the fish are bordering on extinction? Do Japanese people now have to buy crap light bulbs that are not fit for purpose?? Is the yen to be scrapped and replaced with the Euro?? I doubt Japan would accept any of those ridiculous rules and laws and pay more than 26 nations for the privilege. The deal Japan has just got would suit us just fine.A free trade deal without all the baggage while subsidising scrounging nations. Even Boris Johnson quoted the increase in trade with South Korea a couple of month's ago. Not realising, because he is a half wit, that the increase started after the free trade agreement was signed. As to your point that these FTA's do not benefit all members of the EU equally, of course not, as you say all the economies are slightly different. However, as the 2nd or 3rd largest economy in the current EU, shame on us if we don't take advantage. Treaties open the door, it's for us to walk through. As for the rest you state those are the usual rants. Funnily enough I was in Japan last March, their population is declining and the imbalance between working age and retired is going to become critical within 2 decades, they are forecasting a 20% decline in population. At which point their current level of economic output will be unsustainable. They actually need immigration |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 18, 2018 7:32:23 GMT
That's all well and good but we dont benefit from all the trade deals the EU does on our behalf because what may benefit us may not benefit Estonia, Latvia or Spain.All our economies are different as are interest rates and inflation I notice you mentioned the free trade deal the EU did with Japan.Tell me do Japan now have to accept free movement of EU citizens and pay them state benefits provide them with free healthcare education and housing? Are Japan now expected to subsidise 26 nations who dont contribute? Have Japan been forced to let boats from Holland fish in their waters until the fish are bordering on extinction? Do Japanese people now have to buy crap light bulbs that are not fit for purpose?? Is the yen to be scrapped and replaced with the Euro?? I doubt Japan would accept any of those ridiculous rules and laws and pay more than 26 nations for the privilege. The deal Japan has just got would suit us just fine.A free trade deal without all the baggage while subsidising scrounging nations. Even Boris Johnson quoted the increase in trade with South Korea a couple of month's ago. Not realising, because he is a half wit, that the increase started after the free trade agreement was signed. As to your point that these FTA's do not benefit all members of the EU equally, of course not, as you say all the economies are slightly different. However, as the 2nd or 3rd largest economy in the current EU, shame on us if we don't take advantage. Treaties open the door, it's for us to walk through. As for the rest you state those are the usual rants. Funnily enough I was in Japan last March, their population is declining and the imbalance between working age and retired is going to become critical within 2 decades, they are forecasting a 20% decline in population. At which point their current level of economic output will be unsustainable. They actually need immigration The Canadian deal took 9 (?) years to agree. You only have to look at Trump's Trans Pacific Partnership decision to show things are at the behest of two or more governments. No guarantees for some time with the inherent issues with investment. The Japanese trade deal took 6 years to draft, from what I can tell the full details haven't been disclosed yet so not sure we can assume it suits us quite yet. Also, trade deals don't necessarily remove tariffs, they can reduce them or set time limits. Free trade deals may not include all goods and services, just selected ones. If I may use another food analogy, we are swapping an all you can eat buffet for a set menu. Fine if you like what is on it, but restricts the rest of the family. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 8:28:35 GMT
One of the interesting things about the Brexit debate, is the overwhelming wish of those who voted Leave for 'self rule'. The ability to make our own Laws, the ability to determine who is allowed into the country etc etc. Self rule......
When were the people of the UK EVER asked about giving up these things?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jul 18, 2018 8:35:11 GMT
One of the interesting things about the Brexit debate, is the overwhelming wish of those who voted Leave for 'self rule'. The ability to make our own Laws, the ability to determine who is allowed into the country etc etc. Self rule...... When were the people of the UK EVER asked about giving up these things? I think that's position a lot of remainers have some sympathy with too. I think our autonomy was erroded to the point of critical failure. It's a shame we could not have remained in the EU but have regained some of our independence. The 100% IN or 100% OUT option was a stupid position to put to the vote. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 18, 2018 8:48:20 GMT
One of the interesting things about the Brexit debate, is the overwhelming wish of those who voted Leave for 'self rule'. The ability to make our own Laws, the ability to determine who is allowed into the country etc etc. Self rule...... When were the people of the UK EVER asked about giving up these things? I think that's position a lot of remainers have some sympathy with too. I think our autonomy was erroded to the point of critical failure. It's a shame we could not have remained in the EU but have regained some of our independence. The 100% IN or 100% OUT option was a stupid position to put to the vote. At the risk of seeming idealistic, we get to decide every 4-5 years when we send our local MP to Westminster. Perhaps rather than rubber stamp any EU wide decisions, they should be have been delegated to a Select Committee giving Parlimentary oversight and approval. Being a select committee they would have the backing of Parliament without taking up time or risk becoming a political football. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 9:18:04 GMT
I think that's position a lot of remainers have some sympathy with too. I think our autonomy was erroded to the point of critical failure. It's a shame we could not have remained in the EU but have regained some of our independence. The 100% IN or 100% OUT option was a stupid position to put to the vote. At the risk of seeming idealistic, we get to decide every 4-5 years when we send our local MP to Westminster. Perhaps rather than rubber stamp any EU wide decisions, they should be have been delegated to a Select Committee giving Parlimentary oversight and approval. Being a select committee they would have the backing of Parliament without taking up time or risk becoming a political football. That was where a very basic mistake was made. The Brexit Negotiating Team should have been Cross-Party. Both Labour and Tory have turned Brexit into a political argument between themselves, when they should both have been busy working together to implementing the Democratic decision made by the people. Meanwhile, PM May and her advisers have turned Brexit into a joke, while the Labour alternative position (if you can really work out what it is) is pure fantasy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 9:18:54 GMT
One of the interesting things about the Brexit debate, is the overwhelming wish of those who voted Leave for 'self rule'. The ability to make our own Laws, the ability to determine who is allowed into the country etc etc. Self rule...... When were the people of the UK EVER asked about giving up these things? I think that's position a lot of remainers have some sympathy with too. I think our autonomy was erroded to the point of critical failure. It's a shame we could not have remained in the EU but have regained some of our independence. The 100% IN or 100% OUT option was a stupid position to put to the vote. Wasn't the 100% in/ 100% out the only option to give the electorate? I imagine the EU would have laughed at a request to partially withdraw, especially when we want to keep the few best bits and rid ourselves of all the crap. Opting out was the only way to trigger discussion on any alternative deals on the various issues. If the EU remain deliberately obstructive to try and teach us a lesson and protect their future existence there isn't much we can do. If we end up with the so called 'hard brexit' it's more the EU's fault than ours and will be harmful to both sides, at least in the short term. |
|
|
|
Post by jaggas on Jul 18, 2018 9:21:56 GMT
That's all well and good but we dont benefit from all the trade deals the EU does on our behalf because what may benefit us may not benefit Estonia, Latvia or Spain.All our economies are different as are interest rates and inflation I notice you mentioned the free trade deal the EU did with Japan.Tell me do Japan now have to accept free movement of EU citizens and pay them state benefits provide them with free healthcare education and housing? Are Japan now expected to subsidise 26 nations who dont contribute? Have Japan been forced to let boats from Holland fish in their waters until the fish are bordering on extinction? Do Japanese people now have to buy crap light bulbs that are not fit for purpose?? Is the yen to be scrapped and replaced with the Euro?? I doubt Japan would accept any of those ridiculous rules and laws and pay more than 26 nations for the privilege. The deal Japan has just got would suit us just fine.A free trade deal without all the baggage while subsidising scrounging nations. Even Boris Johnson quoted the increase in trade with South Korea a couple of month's ago. Not realising, because he is a half wit, that the increase started after the free trade agreement was signed. As to your point that these FTA's do not benefit all members of the EU equally, of course not, as you say all the economies are slightly different. However, as the 2nd or 3rd largest economy in the current EU, shame on us if we don't take advantage. Treaties open the door, it's for us to walk through. As for the rest you state those are the usual rants. Funnily enough I was in Japan last March, their population is declining and the imbalance between working age and retired is going to become critical within 2 decades, they are forecasting a 20% decline in population. At which point their current level of economic output will be unsustainable. They actually need immigration I'll take it you are correct about Japans shrinking workforce but one thing is for sure and they have stated numerous times is they will not open their country to the third world and import their backward religion and all the problems that come with it.They have to be admired for that sensible policy.Germany have found to their cost that policy is wrong as their welfare bill has grown enormously. |
|
