The 'No to the EU' campaign Vol 2
Discussion
FiF said:
///ajd said:
FiF said:
///ajd said:
i know why you refuse to debate it
its because you can't have it all ways
sucked in indeed - if you start to say "this option" then the question is quickly "but what about this"
you don't want to do that as you know your brexit case just falls to bits
prove me wrong and explain what your flexcit path & end state is!
The reason I refuse to debate it with you is quite simple, and it's due to your repeated tactic of putting up something that someone hasn't said and trying to twist what they have said into some fiction that you put up in order to knock down. It's disingenuous and have no intention of wasting my time with you. These are my last words to you.its because you can't have it all ways
sucked in indeed - if you start to say "this option" then the question is quickly "but what about this"
you don't want to do that as you know your brexit case just falls to bits
prove me wrong and explain what your flexcit path & end state is!
The Market solution sets out the case for why the first stage of the exit process should be as proposed, yes it's a sub optimal situation, but there is no way that anything else can be reached in the time available, that will give a safe, soft, fiscally neutral landing, retaining access to the single market, passporting rights, mutual recognition of standards and eliminating technical barriers to trade, little disruption to trade on either side, but with some concessions, eg four freedoms, still maintaining some payments into EU, still maintaining cooperation, no bonfire of regulations, no massive monetary savings. But the key is out from the dead hand of the EU, out from some regulations that matter and now in a position to review and change.
The path to make those changes will be a long one, for example it sets out a proposal for changes to the Fisheries Policy. Those aren't going to be effected overnight, it will take years, as it needs changes to many areas, not least deciding if that is what we do want to do, and involves many stakeholders. That's just one area. Now extend that to the review of legislation, as will getting our government and civil service back up into the condition to govern, getting our in position and influence back on the global bodies currently denied to us by the EU. 40 years of entanglement are not going to be undone in a few years, it's going to be a long process, that's why it's important to have a state immediately after leaving where there is very little change, a sustainable holding position.
There is no end state, and I fully realise what people like you will make of that statement, but it's simply a recognition that the world is changing, it will continue to change, it has changed from the time when the EU model was founded, which model no longer fits the world today, and the best thing for the UK is to be outside that outdated model which is being rapidly outpaced by events.
But in essence if you want some vision of an end state in respect of our relationship with the EU it's we don't want to be isolationist and inward looking, but a cooperative and supportive sponsor, trading partner and ally rather than a subordinate state in a political union under a supranational government.
I have no idea why you say I want it all ways when have clearly always talked about compromises. I can only conclude it's another of your episodes of making stuff up that people haven't said.
this is when things get a bit vague from here. mention of fisheries, but is that it?
what about
- single market access for ever? or do we step out? why?
- how much will we pay?
- what our immigration posn will be and why?
you say i read more into things - not really, just that when someone talks about wanting one thing i may point out the likely consequences. they say they haven't said it - but thats not the point, the consequence highlighted is still there and that is what goes unanswered. a prime example would be limiting immigration and maintaining single market access. often a poster here will rant about the former, but fall mysteriously silent when asked about the consequences of such a policy on the latter. "i didn't say that!" goes the cry - well quite.
How much will we pay, you've had that answered twice by Ridgemont iirc, and after the second answer you admitted that you'd ignored it because ...?
Immigration position, leaving the EU isn't going to solve our immigration problems. Getting control of our borders, the usual answer, is an aspiration, not a policy. Clearly we will work within international law, but push and pull factors need to be reduced. Again this isn't going to happen overnight as changes need to be made in the infrastructure and agencies tasked with this. Immediately on exit there will be relatively small changes permitted in how intra EU migration can get handled, but considering most of our immigration is from outside EU this is just tatting at the edges. In summary the advantage to be gained from leaving the EU is that independence of action , within the framework of our agreed international law and conventions would enable the UK to target its action without reference to a consensus defined by multiple interests, and instead address real world problems with a view to solving them.
Zod said:
FiF said:
///ajd said:
FiF said:
///ajd said:
i know why you refuse to debate it
its because you can't have it all ways
sucked in indeed - if you start to say "this option" then the question is quickly "but what about this"
you don't want to do that as you know your brexit case just falls to bits
prove me wrong and explain what your flexcit path & end state is!
The reason I refuse to debate it with you is quite simple, and it's due to your repeated tactic of putting up something that someone hasn't said and trying to twist what they have said into some fiction that you put up in order to knock down. It's disingenuous and have no intention of wasting my time with you. These are my last words to you.its because you can't have it all ways
sucked in indeed - if you start to say "this option" then the question is quickly "but what about this"
you don't want to do that as you know your brexit case just falls to bits
prove me wrong and explain what your flexcit path & end state is!
The Market solution sets out the case for why the first stage of the exit process should be as proposed, yes it's a sub optimal situation, but there is no way that anything else can be reached in the time available, that will give a safe, soft, fiscally neutral landing, retaining access to the single market, passporting rights, mutual recognition of standards and eliminating technical barriers to trade, little disruption to trade on either side, but with some concessions, eg four freedoms, still maintaining some payments into EU, still maintaining cooperation, no bonfire of regulations, no massive monetary savings. But the key is out from the dead hand of the EU, out from some regulations that matter and now in a position to review and change.
The path to make those changes will be a long one, for example it sets out a proposal for changes to the Fisheries Policy. Those aren't going to be effected overnight, it will take years, as it needs changes to many areas, not least deciding if that is what we do want to do, and involves many stakeholders. That's just one area. Now extend that to the review of legislation, as will getting our government and civil service back up into the condition to govern, getting our in position and influence back on the global bodies currently denied to us by the EU. 40 years of entanglement are not going to be undone in a few years, it's going to be a long process, that's why it's important to have a state immediately after leaving where there is very little change, a sustainable holding position.
There is no end state, and I fully realise what people like you will make of that statement, but it's simply a recognition that the world is changing, it will continue to change, it has changed from the time when the EU model was founded, which model no longer fits the world today, and the best thing for the UK is to be outside that outdated model which is being rapidly outpaced by events.
But in essence if you want some vision of an end state in respect of our relationship with the EU it's we don't want to be isolationist and inward looking, but a cooperative and supportive sponsor, trading partner and ally rather than a subordinate state in a political union under a supranational government.
I have no idea why you say I want it all ways when have clearly always talked about compromises. I can only conclude it's another of your episodes of making stuff up that people haven't said.
this is when things get a bit vague from here. mention of fisheries, but is that it?
what about
- single market access for ever? or do we step out? why?
- how much will we pay?
- what our immigration posn will be and why?
you say i read more into things - not really, just that when someone talks about wanting one thing i may point out the likely consequences. they say they haven't said it - but thats not the point, the consequence highlighted is still there and that is what goes unanswered. a prime example would be limiting immigration and maintaining single market access. often a poster here will rant about the former, but fall mysteriously silent when asked about the consequences of such a policy on the latter. "i didn't say that!" goes the cry - well quite.
How much will we pay, you've had that answered twice by Ridgemont iirc, and after the second answer you admitted that you'd ignored it because ...?
Immigration position, leaving the EU isn't going to solve our immigration problems. Getting control of our borders, the usual answer, is an aspiration, not a policy. Clearly we will work within international law, but push and pull factors need to be reduced. Again this isn't going to happen overnight as changes need to be made in the infrastructure and agencies tasked with this. Immediately on exit there will be relatively small changes permitted in how intra EU migration can get handled, but considering most of our immigration is from outside EU this is just tatting at the edges. In summary the advantage to be gained from leaving the EU is that independence of action , within the framework of our agreed international law and conventions would enable the UK to target its action without reference to a consensus defined by multiple interests, and instead address real world problems with a view to solving them.
I read this....
" In summary the advantage to be gained from leaving the EU is that independence of action , within the framework of our agreed international law and conventions would enable the UK to target its action without reference to a consensus defined by multiple interests, and instead address real world problems with a view to solving them. "
...its just empty. sorry, but it doesn't say anything.
target its action? what action
Esseesse said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
Zod said:
ou do realise that Step 4 is the current EU (redesignating the non-Eurozone Member States as EEA), but with Switzerland brought into the EEA and thus the current EU? Never going to happen.
Of course I realise that. It's a pictorial way of representing the EU consolidating into the eurozone, which is essentially in place in treaties, which only UK and Denmark having specific opt outs. Then some non EZ nations going into EEA/EFTA rather than an in the EU associate membership. It throws Sweden and Switzerland into the mix. It's a suggestion, no more, hence the title including the word possible, maybe you missed that. Possible does not mean this is the way it must happen or else.Equally it might not include Denmark or Sweden, they can decide for themselves. Agree Swiss is least likely.
Esseesse said:
Not wise, for the Germans will remind us of this after their "victory" on June 24.FiF said:
Zod said:
ou do realise that Step 4 is the current EU (redesignating the non-Eurozone Member States as EEA), but with Switzerland brought into the EEA and thus the current EU? Never going to happen.
Of course I realise that. It's a pictorial way of representing the EU consolidating into the eurozone, which is essentially in place in treaties, which only UK and Denmark having specific opt outs. Then some non EZ nations going into EEA/EFTA rather than an in the EU associate membership. It throws Sweden and Switzerland into the mix. It's a suggestion, no more, hence the title including the word possible, maybe you missed that. Possible does not mean this is the way it must happen or else.Equally it might not include Denmark or Sweden, they can decide for themselves. Agree Swiss is least likely.
Sam All said:
Esseesse said:
Not wise, for the Germans will remind us of this after their "victory" on June 24.///ajd said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
My eyes are affected by hayfever this morning but I couldn't see any support for that placard, is it floating?they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
There's stuff in the background visible beneath it but nothing that appears to support it.
If there is, I'll need to take another antihistamine pill.
turbobloke said:
Sam All said:
Esseesse said:
Not wise, for the Germans will remind us of this after their "victory" on June 24.///ajd said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
My eyes are affected by hayfever this morning but I couldn't see any support for that placard, is it floating?they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
There's stuff in the background visible beneath it but nothing that appears to support it.
If there is, I'll need to take another antihistamine pill.
The independant is reporting lots of camplaints from those who have seen 'them' (I guess more than one) on the M40.
It speaks volumes. It is embarrassing. Unless you are a little englander, in which case they think its great.
///ajd said:
Indeed
I read this....
" In summary the advantage to be gained from leaving the EU is that independence of action , within the framework of our agreed international law and conventions would enable the UK to target its action without reference to a consensus defined by multiple interests, and instead address real world problems with a view to solving them. "
...its just empty. sorry, but it doesn't say anything.
Indeed, it could equally be a press release from the puzzle palace in Strasbourg. I read this....
" In summary the advantage to be gained from leaving the EU is that independence of action , within the framework of our agreed international law and conventions would enable the UK to target its action without reference to a consensus defined by multiple interests, and instead address real world problems with a view to solving them. "
...its just empty. sorry, but it doesn't say anything.
///ajd said:
turbobloke said:
Sam All said:
Esseesse said:
Not wise, for the Germans will remind us of this after their "victory" on June 24.///ajd said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
My eyes are affected by hayfever this morning but I couldn't see any support for that placard, is it floating?they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
There's stuff in the background visible beneath it but nothing that appears to support it.
If there is, I'll need to take another antihistamine pill.
The independant is reporting lots of camplaints from those who have seen 'them' (I guess more than one) on the M40.
turbobloke said:
FiF said:
Zod said:
ou do realise that Step 4 is the current EU (redesignating the non-Eurozone Member States as EEA), but with Switzerland brought into the EEA and thus the current EU? Never going to happen.
Of course I realise that. It's a pictorial way of representing the EU consolidating into the eurozone, which is essentially in place in treaties, which only UK and Denmark having specific opt outs. Then some non EZ nations going into EEA/EFTA rather than an in the EU associate membership. It throws Sweden and Switzerland into the mix. It's a suggestion, no more, hence the title including the word possible, maybe you missed that. Possible does not mean this is the way it must happen or else.Equally it might not include Denmark or Sweden, they can decide for themselves. Agree Swiss is least likely.
0000 said:
///ajd said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
Yeah, except that Vote Leave say they didn't put them up.they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
The poster site looks official, so perhaps the cost of renting that was even more?
Could be Dominic Cummins back garden of course?
Vote leave might just be in denial now its backfired. Like they were with the "NHS leaflets" they were putting in hospitals - see select committee?
turbobloke said:
Unfortunately the Indy report carries no images to compare.
t
tter has plenty, with one with german taped over (infact the one in your post above TB)cummins has spoken
"The campaign director of Vote Leave, Dominic Cummings, said he believed “dummies on our side” were responsible."
Dummies on the leave side? doesn't really narrow it down. sorry
Esseesse said:
///ajd said:
oh dear, poor old vote leave.
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
they just can't keep the mask from slipping, can they!
Do you break out in a sweat when Dad's Army or Basil Fawlty are on TV?I take it you'll also be taking Paddy Power to task over their latest Scotland the Brave ad campaign?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff