How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)
Discussion
Vanden Saab said:
So with 2046 people and 3096 responses either half the people voted twice or a third voted 3 times or or or what an utterly pointless poll. Oh and the harder and softer answers are in relation to renegotiating with Brussels...
But it does does show a couple of things: opinion is split between people who think no deal isn’t a catastrophe, people who want a second referendum so they can vote remain (assuming that’s an option), and leaving still looks inevitable. People on both sides are tired and want to get on with their lives and in many ways, by going against the leave majority, remainers who simply want to stay have just ended up annoying everyone.Elysium said:
Perhaps you should open your mind up to the possibility that these MP's are being honest, that they care about the country and that they want to make sure we get this right?
That would be significantly easier to believe if they'd stood in GE under a manifesto that articulated this. It would also be easier to believe this if they hadn't voted for the Article 50 Bill and the Withdrawal Bill. However, they didn't. So honesty isn't a trait that can be levied at them.
Elysium said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
You still don't get a lot of people voted leave for reasons other than money.
Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
I fully understand that many leavers voted for non-financial reasons. Some clearly believe that short term pain is worth it for the political and social benefits they hope Brexit will bring. Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
The thing is, people who voted remain are not convinced of those upsides. It’s not that they are money oriented. It’s just that the political ‘benefits’ are not meaningful to them. So all they see is the cost.
It’s incredibly obvious when you think about it.
I think you could make the opposite case for Remainers. It's not better inside, it's just worse outside. Hence Project Fear.
ashcroft poll said:
For remain voters, the single most important reason for their decision was that “the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices” (43%).
Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
It's a political choice, always has been. Remain simply cannot win that debate, hence why they've focused almost exclusively on economical arguments. Complete radio silence as to how the political rot will be resolved if we remain, the plan goes no further than "stay in EU". Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
The reason it's critically important to overturn Brexit is because that's the only hope of winning the argument. You've got a shot at "it's worse outside", and not a chance in hell at "it's better inside". Remain relies on the concept that the political s
t is a price worth paying for the economic side, an argument that gets weaker and weaker as time goes by.What's the long-term plan for staying in the EU? Anyone know?!
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
Then we've left. Any arrangements or unilateral policies to mitigate the potential impacts will kick in, and we see where the real challenges are and how effective the contingency planning has been on both sides. Then what?
However, I really cannot see a no deal exit occurring. The most likely position I feel is a move on the backstop sufficient to allow Parliament to vote for it. Either a time limit, or a specific criteria set for it's start/end.
Sway said:
Then we've left. Any arrangements or unilateral policies to mitigate the potential impacts will kick in, and we see where the real challenges are and how effective the contingency planning has been on both sides.
However, I really cannot see a no deal exit occurring. The most likely position I feel is a move on the backstop sufficient to allow Parliament to vote for it. Either a time limit, or a specific criteria set for it's start/end.
I agree. The EU equally don't want to be seen to punish Ireland.However, I really cannot see a no deal exit occurring. The most likely position I feel is a move on the backstop sufficient to allow Parliament to vote for it. Either a time limit, or a specific criteria set for it's start/end.
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
Then what?
been plenty articles linked from the experts recently. 30 mile tail backs to channel ports, an 87% drop in cross channel trade, shouldn't really be a problem due to the fact we have no trade deals and we will all be eating chlorinated chicken. some or all of that may be in jest
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
Sit back with our feet up and drink gin?Then what?
If it were me (once I got bored of the above. Which might take some time) I'd be getting the various government departments to get over their sad loss and start looking at policy deeply. 2-3yrs lost admiring the Brexit problem. Time to now front up.
Any policies that are made possible due to Brexit to be highlighted so we can try and drag ourselves out of the rut we find ourselves in on the topic. Home Secretary, Foreign Office and Trade and Industry to get a particularly big cattle prod up the rear on this, but Health too.
Fox would need to start earning his keep (or be quickly replaced if not cutting it) and I would have him looking first and most deeply at non-EU deals with a view to both getting points on the board and signalling to the EU that we're not going to be painted into a corner. I'd have rep's talking to them, but no priority unless it was clear that a proper negotiation was going to happen (the last 2.5yrs have not been one).
Also need to take a look at the baseline tariff schedule and adjust it to suit the UK's needs (ditto the rule book we migrated over).
Then let's see how we get on with life for a decade, occasionally resurrecting this thread to comment upon how relatively badly/well off we are and gloating with continued banal insults (veiled or otherwise).
After a few GE cycles we'll see if there's any desire to go back in and if so then we should have a people's vote.
Oh, and I'd also set about the structure of our governing system....
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
You still don't get a lot of people voted leave for reasons other than money.
Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
I fully understand that many leavers voted for non-financial reasons. Some clearly believe that short term pain is worth it for the political and social benefits they hope Brexit will bring. Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
The thing is, people who voted remain are not convinced of those upsides. It’s not that they are money oriented. It’s just that the political ‘benefits’ are not meaningful to them. So all they see is the cost.
It’s incredibly obvious when you think about it.
I think you could make the opposite case for Remainers. It's not better inside, it's just worse outside. Hence Project Fear.
ashcroft poll said:
For remain voters, the single most important reason for their decision was that “the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices” (43%).
Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
It's a political choice, always has been. Remain simply cannot win that debate, hence why they've focused almost exclusively on economical arguments. Complete radio silence as to how the political rot will be resolved if we remain, the plan goes no further than "stay in EU". Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
The reason it's critically important to overturn Brexit is because that's the only hope of winning the argument. You've got a shot at "it's worse outside", and not a chance in hell at "it's better inside". Remain relies on the concept that the political s
t is a price worth paying for the economic side, an argument that gets weaker and weaker as time goes by.What's the long-term plan for staying in the EU? Anyone know?!
Leavers are motivated by the 'badly run' bit and want to resign their membership. Remainers think the benefits of membership are sufficient to put up with a few issues on the way.
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
Life goes on. It really is that simple. It is part of why many more older people voted to leave. They have spent their whole lives being told how bad things will be if this or that happens and it never is that bad. Life goes on. Well apart from voting in a Labour Government. Most intelligent older people realise how bad that always turns out...Then what?
Elysium said:
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
You still don't get a lot of people voted leave for reasons other than money.
Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
I fully understand that many leavers voted for non-financial reasons. Some clearly believe that short term pain is worth it for the political and social benefits they hope Brexit will bring. Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
The thing is, people who voted remain are not convinced of those upsides. It’s not that they are money oriented. It’s just that the political ‘benefits’ are not meaningful to them. So all they see is the cost.
It’s incredibly obvious when you think about it.
I think you could make the opposite case for Remainers. It's not better inside, it's just worse outside. Hence Project Fear.
ashcroft poll said:
For remain voters, the single most important reason for their decision was that “the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices” (43%).
Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
It's a political choice, always has been. Remain simply cannot win that debate, hence why they've focused almost exclusively on economical arguments. Complete radio silence as to how the political rot will be resolved if we remain, the plan goes no further than "stay in EU". Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
The reason it's critically important to overturn Brexit is because that's the only hope of winning the argument. You've got a shot at "it's worse outside", and not a chance in hell at "it's better inside". Remain relies on the concept that the political s
t is a price worth paying for the economic side, an argument that gets weaker and weaker as time goes by.What's the long-term plan for staying in the EU? Anyone know?!
Leavers are motivated by the 'badly run' bit and want to resign their membership. Remainers think the benefits of membership are sufficient to put up with a few issues on the way.
Neither of those assumptions seems likely to me. How about you?
Without them, how is our membership tenable in the medium to long term? EU reform could do it, but the EU in its current form shows absolutely zero interest in that. Who knows, maybe the next round of elections will drastically change the situation. I doubt it though.
Sway said:
Elysium said:
Perhaps you should open your mind up to the possibility that these MP's are being honest, that they care about the country and that they want to make sure we get this right?
That would be significantly easier to believe if they'd stood in GE under a manifesto that articulated this. It would also be easier to believe this if they hadn't voted for the Article 50 Bill and the Withdrawal Bill. However, they didn't. So honesty isn't a trait that can be levied at them.
At this point, there is a new dichotomy, it is not choice between leave / remain any more:
On one side, we have people who want Brexit to be done properly in a way that protects our economy and jobs.
On the other we have a new version of Project Fear, but this time, the fear is that any delay or clarification is a risk to Brexit. These people want to get on with it, regardless of the details or future arrangements, because each day that goes by weakens the possibility of it happening. So if they see anyone doing anything other than driving forward Brexit, they interpret it as a threat.
Elysium said:
The EU is a somewhat badly run club.
Leavers are motivated by the 'badly run' bit and want to resign their membership. Remainers think the benefits of membership are sufficient to put up with a few issues on the way.
From most Leavers I've spoken to the fact that the EU is badly run is the least of the problems. It's what it's trying to achieve, a protectionist over regulated superstate, that's the issue. If it was simply badly run it could perhaps be reformed, but the problems are hard wired into the concept. Nobody has even managed to stop the ludicrous business of moving the parliament to Strasbourg and back, so meaningful reform which the commission and some members are against is clearly impossible.Leavers are motivated by the 'badly run' bit and want to resign their membership. Remainers think the benefits of membership are sufficient to put up with a few issues on the way.
wc98 said:
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
Then what?
been plenty articles linked from the experts recently. 30 mile tail backs to channel ports, an 87% drop in cross channel trade, shouldn't really be a problem due to the fact we have no trade deals and we will all be eating chlorinated chicken. amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
You still don't get a lot of people voted leave for reasons other than money.
Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
I fully understand that many leavers voted for non-financial reasons. Some clearly believe that short term pain is worth it for the political and social benefits they hope Brexit will bring. Remainers do seem to revolve entirely around a money vortex.
The thing is, people who voted remain are not convinced of those upsides. It’s not that they are money oriented. It’s just that the political ‘benefits’ are not meaningful to them. So all they see is the cost.
It’s incredibly obvious when you think about it.
I think you could make the opposite case for Remainers. It's not better inside, it's just worse outside. Hence Project Fear.
ashcroft poll said:
For remain voters, the single most important reason for their decision was that “the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices” (43%).
Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
It's a political choice, always has been. Remain simply cannot win that debate, hence why they've focused almost exclusively on economical arguments. Complete radio silence as to how the political rot will be resolved if we remain, the plan goes no further than "stay in EU". Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro.
Just under one in five (17%) said their main reason was that the UK would “become more isolated from its friends and neighbours”
fewer than one in ten (9%) said it was “a strong attachment to the EU and its shared history, culture and traditions.”
The reason it's critically important to overturn Brexit is because that's the only hope of winning the argument. You've got a shot at "it's worse outside", and not a chance in hell at "it's better inside". Remain relies on the concept that the political s
t is a price worth paying for the economic side, an argument that gets weaker and weaker as time goes by.What's the long-term plan for staying in the EU? Anyone know?!
Leavers are motivated by the 'badly run' bit and want to resign their membership. Remainers think the benefits of membership are sufficient to put up with a few issues on the way.
Neither of those assumptions seems likely to me. How about you?
Without them, how is our membership tenable in the medium to long term? EU reform could do it, but the EU in its current form shows absolutely zero interest in that. Who knows, maybe the next round of elections will drastically change the situation. I doubt it though.
The 'problems' of EU membership seem largely theoretical to me. I think we derive a net benefit from membership and it does not seem likely to me that we can replace that with something 'better'. To me there is a risk in leaving. To leave voters there is a risk in staying.
Ghibli said:
OK, let's say we leave with no deal on wto.
Then what?
We wait for the demographics to change a little more then look to rejoin. Sadly I doubt we will get as good a deal as the one we have now, the one negotiated by Thatcher and Major with the rebate, Veto and opt outs from the Euro and Schengen.Then what?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff