Will May Pay or Hope it Fades Away? £55b exit bill...
Discussion
Mrr T said:
Why because it was a cross party organisation could it not come up with a plan? Does that mean they did not speak to each other?
It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
The job of the leave campaign was to win the referendum. It wasn't their job to plan the leave process through to conclusion, that is the government's job.It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
jsf said:
Mrr T said:
Why because it was a cross party organisation could it not come up with a plan? Does that mean they did not speak to each other?
It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
The job of the leave campaign was to win the referendum. It wasn't their job to plan the leave process through to conclusion, that is the government's job.It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
Mrr T said:
Why because it was a cross party organisation could it not come up with a plan? Does that mean they did not speak to each other?
Is this a serious question? Governments enact plans and policies, not pressure groups. How could members of different parties reach any kind of agreement when in some cases they were at odds with their own leaders? Any plan put forward would almost certainly have been binned by the ruling party.
That being said, I personally would like to see a more united front across Parliament in trying to ensure that the UKs best minds work together to get the best deal for the UK. Sadly, listening to Barry Gardiner on the radio this morning was enough to show me why what I want aint gonna happen any time soon.
Mrr T said:
It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
not really. If the SNP had won the referendum, they had a party of Government in place to deliver independence and would have moved to do so. Mrr T said:
It (was) a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
I'd agree on the crap campaign by both sides. I'd doubly agree that Mrs May got the GE campaign spectacularly wrong too. Cynical decision though? No, for the reasons I gave at the start of the post. Mrr T said:
jsf said:
Mrr T said:
Why because it was a cross party organisation could it not come up with a plan? Does that mean they did not speak to each other?
It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
The job of the leave campaign was to win the referendum. It wasn't their job to plan the leave process through to conclusion, that is the government's job.It was clear they chose not to have a plan, a strategy they learnt from the Scottish referendum, where the plan was easily attacked.
It a cynical decision which was typical of the worst campaign, on both sides, I have ever seen in the UK till them. Mind you TM in 2017 might match it.
Mrr T said:
If team leave had produced a creditable plan for brexit I would likely have voted the other way. I also looked at team leave, Grove, BJ, Foxy, IDS, and through do I want them in charge of the brexit negotiations.
So far I think my decision has been justified.
If team remain had produced a credible justification for remaining as an alternative to the OMG the world is gonna end if we leave I may have voted differently So far I think my decision has been justified.
However I have not read anything anywhere that can quantify the benefits of our continued membership of the EU
So like you I think my decision has been justified
It's still an open offer to come and have a look at an old market town if you want to see the downsides to "uncontrolled" migration the river pathway still means when walking a dog that it's human feces you need to watch out for
andymadmak said:
Mrr T said:
Based on that logic I demand a referendum on the creation of a magic money tree. I am sure I would win, its then up to the Government to deliver.
Referendum not necessary. Just vote LabourB'stard Child said:
If team remain had produced a credible justification for remaining as an alternative to the OMG the world is gonna end if we leave I may have voted differently
However I have not read anything anywhere that can quantify the benefits of our continued membership of the EU
So like you I think my decision has been justified
It's still an open offer to come and have a look at an old market town if you want to see the downsides to "uncontrolled" migration the river pathway still means when walking a dog that it's human feces you need to watch out for
More Travellers from Ireland then..........However I have not read anything anywhere that can quantify the benefits of our continued membership of the EU
So like you I think my decision has been justified
It's still an open offer to come and have a look at an old market town if you want to see the downsides to "uncontrolled" migration the river pathway still means when walking a dog that it's human feces you need to watch out for
Mrr T said:
If team leave had produced a creditable plan for brexit I would likely have voted the other way. I also looked at team leave, Grove, BJ, Foxy, IDS, and through do I want them in charge of the brexit negotiations.
So far I think my decision has been justified.
I know others have commented, however there is a key aspect missed - in order to draw up a creditable plan, you need access to the civil service, which Cameron blocked...So far I think my decision has been justified.
As you say, in the Scottish referendum the SNP came up with a white paper that could be properly reviewed, including the assumptions. However, it was not the SNP that developed the white paper, but the Scottish civil service under instruction from the SNP.
Not permitting the civil service to plan or contribute impartially was a travesty and Cameron should not have had the ability to set those constraints.
This one is a no brainer. May will pay. It'll be a lot but not as much as Europe are asking for. That's how negotiations work.
Pay attention to Boris Johnson and David Davis and both stress that the UK is a nation that plays by the rules and pays it's dues. Those are not the words of men who will leave the EU whistling for their cash.
In the to and fro of give and take negotiation it could well be in our long term advantage to throw the EU a bone (A meaty one admittedly) for trade concessions of a greater whole-life value.
Sadly our negotiating position is compromised when the DM reading knuckle dragging Faaaahk Europe types are outraged at any ground our Govt gives even when it's quite pragmatic to do so.
Pay attention to Boris Johnson and David Davis and both stress that the UK is a nation that plays by the rules and pays it's dues. Those are not the words of men who will leave the EU whistling for their cash.
In the to and fro of give and take negotiation it could well be in our long term advantage to throw the EU a bone (A meaty one admittedly) for trade concessions of a greater whole-life value.
Sadly our negotiating position is compromised when the DM reading knuckle dragging Faaaahk Europe types are outraged at any ground our Govt gives even when it's quite pragmatic to do so.
Tannedbaldhead said:
This one is a no brainer. May will pay. It'll be a lot but not as much as Europe are asking for. That's how negotiations work.
Pay attention to Boris Johnson and David Davis and both stress that the UK is a nation that plays by the rules and pays it's dues. Those are not the words of men who will leave the EU whistling for their cash.
In the to and fro of give and take negotiation it could well be in our long term advantage to throw the EU a bone (A meaty one admittedly) for trade concessions of a greater whole-life value.
Sadly our negotiating position is compromised when the DM reading knuckle dragging Faaaahk Europe types are outraged at any ground our Govt gives even when it's quite pragmatic to do so.
It's certainly not pragmatic to give ground on this BEFORE the future trade arrangements are being discussed (as the EU appear to expect).Pay attention to Boris Johnson and David Davis and both stress that the UK is a nation that plays by the rules and pays it's dues. Those are not the words of men who will leave the EU whistling for their cash.
In the to and fro of give and take negotiation it could well be in our long term advantage to throw the EU a bone (A meaty one admittedly) for trade concessions of a greater whole-life value.
Sadly our negotiating position is compromised when the DM reading knuckle dragging Faaaahk Europe types are outraged at any ground our Govt gives even when it's quite pragmatic to do so.
B'stard Child said:
Mrr T said:
If team leave had produced a creditable plan for brexit I would likely have voted the other way. I also looked at team leave, Grove, BJ, Foxy, IDS, and through do I want them in charge of the brexit negotiations.
So far I think my decision has been justified.
If team remain had produced a credible justification for remaining as an alternative to the OMG the world is gonna end if we leave I may have voted differently So far I think my decision has been justified.
However I have not read anything anywhere that can quantify the benefits of our continued membership of the EU
So like you I think my decision has been justified
It's still an open offer to come and have a look at an old market town if you want to see the downsides to "uncontrolled" migration the river pathway still means when walking a dog that it's human feces you need to watch out for
So it's now Team Remain's fault that we're upto our necks in doo-doo?
They really could not have made it more clear.
.
sidicks said:
It's certainly not pragmatic to give ground on this BEFORE the future trade arrangements are being discussed (as the EU appear to expect).
Europe may well be shooting itself in the foot here. Settling accounts prior to trade negotiations will net what is due after line by line scrutiny of the "books" but not a penny more. If they want sufficient and ongoing funding to plug their financial black holes the time to agree payments is when you, in turn, have something to offer. Tannedbaldhead said:
Pay attention to Boris Johnson and David Davis and both stress that the UK is a nation that plays by the rules and pays it's dues. Those are not the words of men who will leave the EU whistling for their cash.
I'm not convinced you've read that right, the UK will play by the rules, the problem for the EU is that the rules don't say anything about paying for things that the EU has committed to after we've left or paying to be able to buy stuff from the EU or paying any sort of divorce settlement. Playing by the rules would leave the EU whistling for our cash.
Whether that's how it pans out is another matter, but I think you've probably misread those comments.
Sway said:
Mrr T said:
If team leave had produced a creditable plan for brexit I would likely have voted the other way. I also looked at team leave, Grove, BJ, Foxy, IDS, and through do I want them in charge of the brexit negotiations.
So far I think my decision has been justified.
I know others have commented, however there is a key aspect missed - in order to draw up a creditable plan, you need access to the civil service, which Cameron blocked...So far I think my decision has been justified.
As you say, in the Scottish referendum the SNP came up with a white paper that could be properly reviewed, including the assumptions. However, it was not the SNP that developed the white paper, but the Scottish civil service under instruction from the SNP.
Not permitting the civil service to plan or contribute impartially was a travesty and Cameron should not have had the ability to set those constraints.
paulrockliffe said:
I'm not convinced you've read that right, the UK will play by the rules, the problem for the EU is that the rules don't say anything about paying for things that the EU has committed to after we've left or paying to be able to buy stuff from the EU or paying any sort of divorce settlement.
Playing by the rules would leave the EU whistling for our cash.
Whether that's how it pans out is another matter, but I think you've probably misread those comments.
Didn't BJ say that we would meet all our legal and moral obligations and that the UK is a Law abiding and bill paying nation. And didn't he retrospectively expand on his whistle comment adding it wasn't the principle of payment that was the issue but the amount? Am sure I heard that on his last interview on Radio 4. Playing by the rules would leave the EU whistling for our cash.
Whether that's how it pans out is another matter, but I think you've probably misread those comments.
To me that sounds like softening hard line Brexiteers for a payment.
No wonder the EU is so desperate to get a big wedge of cash out of the UK when it leaves, because they know full well that the German taxpayer will have to stump up all the extra cash needed to kick the failed EU ponzi scheme can down the road a little bit longer. They need that cash to keep the failed wet dream alive a little bit longer, and when the current net beneficiary member state countries realize they will have to start paying money into the EU`s coffers rather than getting handouts from it, they too will leave in droves.
Mrr T said:
Richard North with the help of many contributors to Eureferendum.com produced a detailed and credible plan without any access to any civil servants. The lack of a plan was a cynical ploy by team leave to keep the immigration zealots on side.
Richard North is not a member of the government/civil service either. Him putting a plan together that you believe is credible has zero relevance whatsoever. "Perfect plans" on paper quite often do not work out that way in real life. Thankfully for me... I'm often engaged by clients whose perfect plans failed and are non-plussed as to why, bearing in mind they were perfect
Not having access to the resources needed to execute a perfect plan during the planning stages is one of the reasons they fail IME
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff