How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 9)

[Helicopter123]

andymadmak said:

Andy20vt said:

That is exactly what the EU hope we will do. They want us to be a part of it. We have been the ones being stand offish over the years.

I tried politely asking H123 this question yesterday, but sadly he declined to give any meaningful answer, so perhaps you might share your thoughts on the following?:

Assuming that there were to be a second referendum, what kind of Remain are you anticipating (FTR, H123 response was that he was happy with the Thatcher/Major negotiated deal - the deal that no longer actually exists!) Specifically I am eager to understand whether you want to Remain based on the pre June 2016 being preserved in perpetuity or whether you would prefer to see a Remain vote, followed by an ever closer harmonisation and integration of the UK into the EU over the next (say) 20 years? If you're voting for Remain in Ref2, what are you voting for exactly?

This was answered yesterday, as far as possible.

Of course the EU will continue to evolve, and our elected governments of the day will represent our interests within any changes. As a significant member, we will have a meaningful say in any changes, and ultimately hold a veto.

[anonymous-user]

andymadmak said:

Andy20vt said:

That is exactly what the EU hope we will do. They want us to be a part of it. We have been the ones being stand offish over the years.

I tried politely asking H123 this question yesterday, but sadly he declined to give any meaningful answer, so perhaps you might share your thoughts on the following?:

Assuming that there were to be a second referendum, what kind of Remain are you anticipating (FTR, H123 response was that he was happy with the Thatcher/Major negotiated deal - the deal that no longer actually exists!) Specifically I am eager to understand whether you want to Remain based on the pre June 2016 being preserved in perpetuity or whether you would prefer to see a Remain vote, followed by an ever closer harmonisation and integration of the UK into the EU over the next (say) 20 years? If you're voting for Remain in Ref2, what are you voting for exactly?

Remain is Remain, to stay in the EU. We would then have the option to influence EU policy, (as the second biggest economy within the EU) from the inside. We would also benefit from the recent Canada and Japenese trade deals.

As we know though, things change. In light of this, what would be nice as part of this Remain is if the public were kept engaged and better informed. Firstly we'd need to elect some MEP's who are actually fit for purpose (not Farage and Co.) Perhaps the public should also have a further say if anything significant changed within the EU, e.g. a significant devolution of power etc.

Perhaps a check referendum every 5-10 years going forward, or perhaps forcing the main political parties making much clearer mandates before elections (that they would then be held accountable to) on what their EU stance and objectives were for the next 5 years. This would firstly keep the EU and our politicians on their toes, and secondly, give the public a much more democratic route forward.

[andymadmak]

Helicopter123 said:

This was answered yesterday, as far as possible.

Of course the EU will continue to evolve, and our elected governments of the day will represent our interests within any changes. As a significant member, we will have a meaningful say in any changes, and ultimately hold a veto.

And again you don't answer.
I asked you what you wanted/expected to see. What Remain would you be voting for? We keep being told that we didn't know what Brexit we were voting for. OK, maybe for some people that is true. All I am asking is for you to articulate what voting Remain means for you for the next 20 years. ' we will have a say and we have a veto' is not an answer now is it?

[Nickgnome]

TEKNOPUG said:

So there is nothing wrong with the numbers. Whether the money will actually be spent on the NHS is a different matter.

• https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsec...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-rebat...

Guenther Oettinger is not the ECJ

[TEKNOPUG]

Andy20vt said:

TEKNOPUG said:

OK, lets work out how wrong you are together:

2016 Gross EU payment = 18.9bn
2016 Rebate = 5bn
2016 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 4.9bn
2016 Net Payment = 9.9bn

Rebates are scheduled to be removed in 2021
The EU Funded Public Sector credits are not spent on the NHS

So from 2021:

2021 Gross EU payment = 18.9bn
2021 Rebate = 0bn
2021 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 4.9bn
2021 Net Payment = 15.9bn

Post Brexit the figures for 2021 would be:

2021 Gross EU payment = 0bn
2021 Rebate = 0bn
2021 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 0bn
2021 Net Saving = 18.9bn

18.9bn / 52 weeks = 363m

So there is nothing wrong with the numbers. Whether the money will actually be spent on the NHS is a different matter.

• https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsec...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-rebat...

Errrr you have distorted the figures somewhat there and also assumed that the UK decides to backtrack and remain in the EU. The removal of our rebate was only ever an opinion stated by EU official Günther Oettinger, it is not yet and probably would never be EU Policy. You have also assumed sneakily that the 4.9 billion credit would also not have to be made up for from general taxation or alternatively that the public would have to fund a significant portion of that 350million a week directly from their pay packets.

Brexiteer using smoke and mirrors to prove a point - who'd have thought!

The claim was based upon the UK leaving the EU - so the removal of the rebate will definitely be happening......

ALL OF THE fkING MONEY COMES FROM GENERAL TAXATION!!!!!!!!!

£18.9Billion comes from general taxation, which we give to the EU. Who then give some back to us in the form of a rebate or spend some here on other stuff. Or we could not give them any money at all and spend it all on something else.

Remainer who hasn't got a clue how even basic taxation and economics works - who'd have thought.........

[gooner1]

ElectricSoup said:

No, I have no proof Remain is now the majority. Of course I fking don't. That's the whole point. But given so much has changed, public opinion may well have done too.

It's really not hard and there's only one way to tell.

Anyway, I'd rather not have a referendum. I'd rather A50 was revoked.

Don't panic Soupy, Uri's got it covered for Remainers.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/tv/gm...

[Nickgnome]

TEKNOPUG said:

The claim was based upon the UK leaving the EU - so the removal of the rebate will definitely be happening......

ALL OF THE fkING MONEY COMES FROM GENERAL TAXATION!!!!!!!!!

£18.9Billion comes from general taxation, which we give to the EU. Who then give some back to us in the form of a rebate or spend some here on other stuff. Or we could not give them any money at all and spend it all on something else.

Remainer who hasn't got a clue how even basic taxation and economics works - who'd have thought.........

You are incorrect as evidenced in your own link.

We have not left the EU and will not leave until either 29 March 12 April or 22 May depending on what happens over the next few days.

The Eu does not return the rebate as we do not pay it in the first place.

The Eu do however return funds to the UK for other items.

Until we have actually left the EU the ECJ ruling still applies.

[anonymous-user]

TEKNOPUG said:

Andy20vt said:

TEKNOPUG said:

OK, lets work out how wrong you are together:

2016 Gross EU payment = 18.9bn
2016 Rebate = 5bn
2016 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 4.9bn
2016 Net Payment = 9.9bn

Rebates are scheduled to be removed in 2021
The EU Funded Public Sector credits are not spent on the NHS

So from 2021:

2021 Gross EU payment = 18.9bn
2021 Rebate = 0bn
2021 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 4.9bn
2021 Net Payment = 15.9bn

Post Brexit the figures for 2021 would be:

2021 Gross EU payment = 0bn
2021 Rebate = 0bn
2021 EU Funded Public Sector credits = 0bn
2021 Net Saving = 18.9bn

18.9bn / 52 weeks = 363m

So there is nothing wrong with the numbers. Whether the money will actually be spent on the NHS is a different matter.

• https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsec...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-rebat...

Errrr you have distorted the figures somewhat there and also assumed that the UK decides to backtrack and remain in the EU. The removal of our rebate was only ever an opinion stated by EU official Günther Oettinger, it is not yet and probably would never be EU Policy. You have also assumed sneakily that the 4.9 billion credit would also not have to be made up for from general taxation or alternatively that the public would have to fund a significant portion of that 350million a week directly from their pay packets.

Brexiteer using smoke and mirrors to prove a point - who'd have thought!

The claim was based upon the UK leaving the EU - so the removal of the rebate will definitely be happening......

ALL OF THE fkING MONEY COMES FROM GENERAL TAXATION!!!!!!!!!

£18.9Billion comes from general taxation, which we give to the EU. Who then give some back to us in the form of a rebate or spend some here on other stuff. Or we could not give them any money at all and spend it all on something else.

Remainer who hasn't got a clue how even basic taxation and economics works - who'd have thought.........

But you are counting the Rebate/Credit as a double negative (or whatever the term is). We spend £8.9 billion NET a year on the EU. If we suddenly stop doing that it does not magic (through your maths) to become a £18.9 billion pound saving. The saving is simply £8.9 billion. We can't save what we haven't spent!!!!

[Earthdweller]

Robertj21a said:

Andy20vt said:

Zigster said:

Earthdweller said:

My sources tell me

Met estimate :200k
LFB estimate :450k

“My sources” ...

That’s really convincing. Either they are credible sources and you can name them, or they aren’t credible.

Who really gives an F how many there were? Even if it's the much lower Brexiteers spun 200k estimate, that's still in the region of 2,000 times the number who tuned up for Nigels sorry little pub crawl the other day.

And why do the Brexiteers comment on this anyway? On one hand they claim they don't care about the march, it means nothing apparently. On the other hand they try to belittle it because they see it as a threat.

So which one is it? Do you care or not care, because if you don't care as you claim the march seems to have done a bl*ody good job of winding you right up?

More interestingly, why do you continue to prattle on about it ?. I don't care how many went on a fruitless march and I don't understand why any Leavers should be interested in a silly numbers game.

My source is credible, and no I’m not naming them

The emergency services routinely estimate the numbers of people attending events

The Met have been recording, accurately, the numbers at events in London since 1829

As I said in the original post it comes from someone who was watching the march on Westminster cctv and police helicopter footage

Id rather take the word of someone I know giving a figure in their professional role, to estimate numbers for public safety, rather than someone looking to score points

And no, I’m not a rabid leaver before you jump on that

I’m just saying that between the Met and LFB they put the numbers attending at between 200-450k

Take it or leave it I don’t give a fk really whether you believe me or not

[anonymous-user]

Piha said:

NorfolkInClue1 said:

andymadmak said:

Piha said:

I was trying to engage with the small but noisy Brexiteer protest in Trafalgar Sq on Saturday and they informed me that "all the football firms will be turning up" for Nigel's march in London. I dread to think what will happen when drink fuelled rival football supporters congregate in central London.

The small Brexit protest was moved along by police officers when one of them started verbally abusing and swinging fists at an elderly lady.

Cool story bro. Seems legit

I believe him because he mentioned an elderly lady, that dramatic touch to the story line almost had me in tears.......now where’s the link to the petition, this tragic story has convinced me to change my mind.......

Mind you, you would hope that any police officer who witnessed someone swinging punches at an elderly lady would arrest them rather than move them on, such an arrest would surely have been referenced/witnessed by the public and caught on camera
Such a tense flash point must have been noticed by more than just one of the million followers as it would be brilliant media fodder.....just saying...

Oh, and Piha, you’re well short of 500 words, also a little late......

Are you getting a little confused again? It seems to be a reoccurring theme with you.

NorfolkInClue1 said:

Oh, and we found out that 5m remainers have a valid email address but the other 11 million are either too angry to type or have switched to remain.

Maybe it's time for a nice cup of tea and a little nap?

Not confused, just offering a review of your story about your day out, it's fantastic. More holes than a Swiss cheese, but entertaining none the less.

Oh, and I'm ok for a nap, tea would be nice, white no sugar.......ooops, sorry, I said white and with me being a leave that must confirm I'm racist.
My apologies I'll try to be more accurate so......light brown and no sugar.....oh feck it........

Thought you'd enjoy my baseless twisting of figures to suit my point, I learned from the best remainers in here...........

[Nickgnome]

Andy20vt said:

But you are counting the Rebate/Credit as a double negative (or whatever the term is). We spend £8.9 billion NET a year on the EU. If we suddenly stop doing that it does not magic (through your maths) to become a £18.9 billion pound saving. The saving is simply £8.9 billion. We can't save what we haven't spent!!!!

Please do not quote all. It makes the thread unwieldy.

[andymadmak]

Andy20vt said:

andymadmak said:

Andy20vt said:

That is exactly what the EU hope we will do. They want us to be a part of it. We have been the ones being stand offish over the years.

I tried politely asking H123 this question yesterday, but sadly he declined to give any meaningful answer, so perhaps you might share your thoughts on the following?:

Assuming that there were to be a second referendum, what kind of Remain are you anticipating (FTR, H123 response was that he was happy with the Thatcher/Major negotiated deal - the deal that no longer actually exists!) Specifically I am eager to understand whether you want to Remain based on the pre June 2016 being preserved in perpetuity or whether you would prefer to see a Remain vote, followed by an ever closer harmonisation and integration of the UK into the EU over the next (say) 20 years? If you're voting for Remain in Ref2, what are you voting for exactly?

Remain is Remain, to stay in the EU. We would then have the option to influence EU policy, (as the second biggest economy within the EU) from the inside. We would also benefit from the recent Canada and Japenese trade deals.

OK. That's a fair start. From my perspective as a supporter of Brexit I believe that within the next 20 years (I am being consistent with the use of the 20 year window for both sides of this debate, although I genuinely believe that the time frame will be far shorter than this) the UK will also be able to benefit from bespoke trade deals with Canada, Japan and many other countries, including the USA and China (with which neither the UK or EU currently has a deal)

Andy20vt said:

As we know though, things change. In light of this, what would be nice as part of this Remain is if the public were kept engaged and better informed.

I would agree 100%. But sadly it is not going to happen is it? Why on earth would politicians suddenly change the behaviour of 100s of years?

Andy20vt said:

Firstly we'd need to elect some MEP's who are actually fit for purpose (not Farage and Co.)

The public should be allowed to elect anyone they want to represent them (assuming they are not criminals)
Are you suggesting that only MEP candidates that support the idea of the EU should be allowed to stand?

Andy20vt said:

Perhaps the public should also have a further say if anything significant changed within the EU, e.g. a significant devolution of power etc.

How would this work? We have already seen how Brown moved the goalposts to avoid just this provision when it came to the Lisbon treaty. Seems a bit naive to me.

Andy20vt said:

Perhaps a check referendum every 5-10 years going forward,

That's going to be just great for business....... Also, why would anyone believe that this would be an effective tool, given that the ONLY referendum on the subject of EU membership in the last 40 years (yes I know it was not the EU 40 years ago) would have been comprehensively ignored by those same politicians that you're assuming are now going to be honest going forward, and who will be unrestrained in their ability to obfuscate because the politicians who might expose them (Farage et al) are not being allowed to stand..
You're starting to worry me!

Andy20vt said:

or perhaps forcing the main political parties making much clearer mandates before elections (that they would then be held accountable to) on what their EU stance and objectives were for the next 5 years. This would firstly keep the EU and our politicians on their toes, and secondly, give the public a much more democratic route forward.

Like at the last election, when both major parties promised to abide by the result of the referendum.

This isn't going to work is it. And whilst I genuinely appreciate your taking the time to answer, I note that you, like H123 are strangely silent on what it is you are actually voting for. Yes you have suggested some checks and balances, but what is YOUR vision for the EU over the next 20 years and what is your vision for the UKs position within that? Surely you MUST know what you are voting for? Schengen perhaps? Euro membership? What about Federal taxation? What is it that you want to see?

Edited by andymadmak on Monday 25th March 12:10

[psi310398]

Andy20vt said:

Remain is Remain, to stay in the EU. We would then have the option to influence EU policy, (as the second biggest economy within the EU) from the inside. We would also benefit from the recent Canada and Japenese trade deals.

As we know though, things change. In light of this, what would be nice as part of this Remain is if the public were kept engaged and better informed. Firstly we'd need to elect some MEP's who are actually fit for purpose (not Farage and Co.) Perhaps the public should also have a further say if anything significant changed within the EU, e.g. a significant devolution of power etc.

Perhaps a check referendum every 5-10 years going forward, or perhaps forcing the main political parties making much clearer mandates before elections (that they would then be held accountable to) on what their EU stance and objectives were for the next 5 years. This would firstly keep the EU and our politicians on their toes, and secondly, give the public a much more democratic route forward.

With the greatest respect, have you been borrowing Leave's unicorns?!!

[anonymous-user]

If another vote is called and we remain, it sets a dangerous precedent of...everytime you vote anything in, the vote doesn't count.

Tories voted in? Let's just vote again until Labour get in.

Of course this also works if Labour get voted in except the right don't tend to resort to such stupidity (in both the UK and USA unlike the left/democrats as seen by this "not my President" nonsense.

[anonymous-user]

andymadmak said:

And whilst I genuinely appreciate your taking the time to answer, I note that you, like H123 are strangely silent on what it is you are actually voting for. Yes you have suggested some checks and balances, but what is YOUR vision for the EU over the next 20 years and what is your vision for the UKs position within that? Surely you MUST know what you are voting for? Schengen perhaps? Euro membership? What about Federal taxation? What is it that you want to see?

To maintain the status quo e.g. to stay out of the Euro currency but be part of the single market, customs union and allowing free movement of people. To remain part of the most successful union of Nations the world has ever seen. To have the ability to influence the EU from the inside, and take advantages of all the freedoms to work and travel that this affords us. Plus to retain the other huge benefits the EU currently offers (far too many to list here).

To make this work there will be some compromises we have to make, there will also be some compromises the EU's other nations will have to make. These can be assessed on a case by case basis as we always have done.

What's wrong with that - why do you expect there has to be some sort of grand plan or vision?

[vonuber]

The problem is 'compromise'. As shown by our own politicians, it seems beyond us as a country.

Why, is a good question.

[anonymous-user]

mehmehmeh said:

If another vote is called and we remain, it sets a dangerous precedent of...everytime you vote anything in, the vote doesn't count.

Tories voted in? Let's just vote again until Labour get in.

Errrr I don't get what you are saying. Did you expect Brexit to be delivered the day after the referendum, or do we need time to follow through with due diligence? This is how democracy works. Situations change, people change. It is the reason we have general elections every 4/5 years, to allow people to change their minds.

[TEKNOPUG]

Andy20vt said:

But you are counting the Rebate/Credit as a double negative (or whatever the term is). We spend £8.9 billion NET a year on the EU. If we suddenly stop doing that it does not magic (through your maths) to become a £18.9 billion pound saving. The saving is simply £8.9 billion. We can't save what we haven't spent!!!!

The EU funded public credit is not spent on the NHS; it is spent in the UK by the EU. The net figure is therefore incorrect (unless you consider your personal taxation to be zero because the government spends all the money on "you"?). The figure we give to the EU (which could be spent elsewhere) is £13.9billion.

The UK rebate has already seen a 20% reduction and it is quite clear that there is a desire to remove the rebate within the European Commission. Add to the growing pressure by the EU to move to QMV, it's quite conceivable that both the UK's veto and rebate would disappear within a couple of parliamentary cycles. So the numbers are entirely valid as a guide to potential Brexit savings given current EU expenditure.

Whether they will be spent on the NHS is moot but it also seems somewhat irrelevant given demonstrably incorrect numbers published by the chancellor at the time of the referendum. I'm not sure what the point is of continually regurgitating claim and counter-claim from 3 years ago, like some Brexit trope tourettes. Some people seem incapable of discussion current (and future) affairs for more than a couple of posts without returning to the hustings of pre June 2016. Very odd behaviour.

[psi310398]

Andy20vt said:

...

To remain part of the most successful union of Nations the world has ever seen.

...

Evidence/reasoning for this rather bold assertion would be helpful.

China seems to have done rather better for longer.

The United States ditto.

[anonymous-user]

Andy20vt said:

Piha said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

Turfy said:

Experts suggest c.300k people at the march yesterday. More sensationalisation and brainwashing from the Remainer brigade. I was at the "no war in Iraq march" and they said 1m people were there, no way. nowhere near as many people at the "stop the Brexit march"...

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/brexit-march-peopl...

100,000 were tourists

Brexiteers keep telling us they're not interested in our glorious Remain marches, yet they just keep on bringing it up time and time again! They really can't help themselves.

Seriously chaps, just let it go if you think it's irrelevant.

They continue to try to claim it isn't relevant (same with the petition), but then they continue to try to discredit it like it is hugely relevant. Go figure . . . .

Calm down chaps, it's not hard after this many volumes is it......
When some from the remain camp come on and start posting about a million people at a march and making this number the central evidential factor when making a point about the nation agreeing with them, but then not being able to actually provide evidence to confirm the million ( obviously as they can't but are happy to state it as fact ) then it's open to both debate and a little humour.
If you two see that as obsession then no worries, there were clearly several hundred thousand, genuinely impressive, however without knowing how many there had attended because they changed there minds then it's just a protest from a section of society that has already proved its numbers are in the millions due to voting figures.
Posters from both side will spend pages on here demanding and demanding proof for anything that dares to challenge their view, not because they want to understand others, nope, they want to win on the internet.
This march is no different, however it is noticeable that some posters on here seem to demand more than they are willing to provide.........yet again.....