European Union Referendum

[Habbinalan]

House of Lords Constitution Committee: Parliamentary involvement and assent is required for invoking Article 50.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/c...ittee/news-parliament-2015/article-50-report/

 

[Vanni]

I believe the UK will remain in the EU.

That's all. Thank you.

 

[silkyman]

That's what readers of The Sun would say

It's such an odd comment especially as I pretty much argue the opposite case to the Sun on most issues. Especially in this part of the forum.

The Sun is dangerous enough as it is without anyone who actually picks them up on their bullshit being shot down with 'yeah but you read the sun'

 

[silkyman]

Theresa May at PMQs reiterated that she wants to remove 'freedom of movement' because that is what 'the people' wanted.

Did they? That seems like 'the nuclear option' here. Completely ditching any chance of a soft brexit, seriously inhibiting any chance of retaining access to the single market and everything that goes with it.

Was 'close the borders and to hell with the consequences' really what the majority went for?

 

[merseyboyred]

I don't think it's too wild to suggest that a large proportion of those who voted to leave did so because they wanted to close the border.

 

[Alty]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37359196

Once again...thank goodness we're free.

A "dangerous fantasy" eh Cleggers?

 

[.V.]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37359196

Once again...thank goodness we're free.

A "dangerous fantasy" eh Cleggers?

I voted to remain, but even I find this sort of talk a bit much. You'd think they'd dial the rhetoric down since the Brexit vote, with the FN and the Dutch Party for Freedom doing well in the polls.

 

[Alty]

I voted to remain, but even I find this sort of talk a bit much. You'd think they'd dial the rhetoric down since the Brexit vote, with the FN and the Dutch Party for Freedom doing well in the polls.

They're fanatics mate. So many British people still fail to realise that the end game here is a federal country called Europe with expansionist ambitions.

Brexit has the potential to halt and reverse the project but it may depend on how successful we are in the next 10-20 years.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

Two reason to me, yes there's a layer of politicians utterly fanatical about their federalist ideal.

But more practically and cynically, they need to make a bit of noise on integration and the project's progression in order to give out the signal that the UK vote hasn't weakened the federalist EU movement in any way, and that EU skeptic movements around Europe shouldn't hope that the UK result slows down or changes the course.

Had they turned around and gave out the message that, hang on, after the UK vote maybe we should change rhetoric or intention, it would be seen as a sign of weakness.

 

[silkyman]

I don't think it's too wild to suggest that a large proportion of those who voted to leave did so because they wanted to close the border.

It would need to have been almost everyone who voted for it to be accurate that 'the people voted to close the borders'

If even 8% of people who voted out, actually wanted to remain in the single market - free movement included - but wanted out for other reasons (I've been told many times, probably even in this thread if I could be arsed to go back to check, that 'immigration wasn't the only issue, especially when picking up on that horrendous UKIP poster and the lies about Turkey) then the majority of people who voted, don't want to close the borders.

But that's the first solid thing they have said about what Brexshit actually means.

 

[silkyman]

Incidentally.. If we need to leave the Eu to secure trade deals with the likes of China, why have we just bought a nuclear power station from them?

 

[BigDaveCUFC]

I still have to laugh at how the exit voters havn't yep grasped the fact that 'amazingly' the EU will actually want some demands in return for our demands.

I think a portion genuinely believe that they could just ask for whatever setting they wanted and think the EU will back down because they'd be so desperate for trade links with us...............and worrying because a good portion of these people are MP's or MEP's

Brexit will end up destroying the conservatives over the next 3-4 years in regards to public opinion, it is a lose-lose role, Cameron knew it and its why he jumped ASAP, the biggest worry at present is what on earth is going to replace them, Labour is an atrocious mess and I wonder what alternatives we have.

 

[Captain Scumbag]

With a view to keeping the forum's stupid quotient at tolerable levels, can the powers that be please lock this thread until Article 50 is invoked. If the bastards never invoke it, I can at least enjoy the permanent closure of this thread as compensation. Thanks.

 

[Alty]

Incidentally.. If we need to leave the Eu to secure trade deals with the likes of China, why have we just bought a nuclear power station from them?

Pretty sure nobody has ever claimed it's impossible to obtain non-EU goods or services until Brexit.

Not that we're "buying a nuclear power station from the Chinese" anyway - it's a tad more complicated than that.

Again, I suspect you could understand all this if you weren't so wedded to your own world view.

 

[.V.]

I still have to laugh at how the exit voters havn't yep grasped the fact that 'amazingly' the EU will actually want some demands in return for our demands.

I think a portion genuinely believe that they could just ask for whatever setting they wanted and think the EU will back down because they'd be so desperate for trade links with us...............and worrying because a good portion of these people are MP's or MEP's

Brexit will end up destroying the conservatives over the next 3-4 years in regards to public opinion, it is a lose-lose role, Cameron knew it and its why he jumped ASAP, the biggest worry at present is what on earth is going to replace them, Labour is an atrocious mess and I wonder what alternatives we have.

https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/777618056096907264

 

[JaseTheVillain]

With a view to keeping the forum's stupid quotient at tolerable levels, can the powers that be please lock this thread until Article 50 is invoked. If the bastards never invoke it, I can at least enjoy the permanent closure of this thread as compensation. Thanks.

This.

 

[silkyman]

Pretty sure nobody has ever claimed it's impossible to obtain non-EU goods or services until Brexit.

Not that we're "buying a nuclear power station from the Chinese" anyway - it's a tad more complicated than that.

Again, I suspect you could understand all this if you weren't so wedded to your own world view.

I've seen plenty of 'Leavers' triumphantly exclaiming that 'look... Australia and Mexico want trade deals... Ha.'

It was one of Leave's key soapboxes. 'We will be FREE to trade with the world on our terms' and now we can do what we could do anyway. Trade with countries inside and outside of the EU.

Yes. Of course Mexico, Australia etc will want to cut a deal. They want to sell us stuff too.

Everyone will. The question is whether the trade deal WE get is better or worse than the one that the EU collectively gets. IF 'we' as a nation get better trade terms on our own with everyone, then great. Well done everyone. If we get a worse one, which as a smaller entity is probably what will happen, then what was the fucking point of breaking away for the freedom to have a worse deal?

Throw in the whole access to the single market issue (Brexit means taking control of our borders and only taking control of our borders so far) and the UK could be 'free' to have a worse international trade situation than the one they currently have, and which will take years and years of uncertainty, negotiations, and interim WTO terms. Which would be, what? Great?

 

[Laker]

I've seen plenty of 'Leavers' triumphantly exclaiming that 'look... Australia and Mexico want trade deals... Ha.'

It was one of Leave's key soapboxes. 'We will be FREE to trade with the world on our terms' and now we can do what we could do anyway. Trade with countries inside and outside of the EU.

Yes. Of course Mexico, Australia etc will want to cut a deal. They want to sell us stuff too.

Everyone will. The question is whether the trade deal WE get is better or worse than the one that the EU collectively gets. IF 'we' as a nation get better trade terms on our own with everyone, then great. Well done everyone. If we get a worse one, which as a smaller entity is probably what will happen, then what was the fucking point of breaking away for the freedom to have a worse deal?

Throw in the whole access to the single market issue (Brexit means taking control of our borders and only taking control of our borders so far) and the UK could be 'free' to have a worse international trade situation than the one they currently have, and which will take years and years of uncertainty, negotiations, and interim WTO terms. Which would be, what? Great?

Think the key word in your entire post is "question" which basically means the rest of your post is nothing more than guesswork and speculation.

You will never know if the deals we get once we leave are better or worse than they would have been if we stayed in the EU because we won't see both scenarios unfold - this would have been the case if we had voted to stay too. Therefore your question is largely pointless as it could never be fucking answered.

Anywar, my sense from some remainers is that they actually want the UK to cut shit deals which takes "years and years", and leads to "uncertainty" in order to justify their vote to remain.

 

[silkyman]

We will absolutely know whether or not it would have been better or worse. If the EU gets a better deal than the UK does, then we have lost out.

The EU deal would have been our deal if we'd stayed in. You will be able to line the two up side by side and compare.

 

[Alty]

We will absolutely know whether or not it would have been better or worse. If the EU gets a better deal than the UK does, then we have lost out.

The EU deal would have been our deal if we'd stayed in. You will be able to line the two up side by side and compare.

The EU has repeatedly proven itself to be pretty poor at negotiating trade deals precisely because it's a cumbersome organisation with competing interests. Look how long negotiations with the US have taken. And what was eventually put on the table - TTIP - was a complete turd that threatened public services and now looks to be dead in the water.

I really do pity people who are desperate for their own country to fail because it'll give them a chance to say "I told you so".

 

[mnb089mnb]

The EU has repeatedly proven itself to be pretty poor at negotiating trade deals precisely because it's a cumbersome organisation with competing interests. Look how long negotiations with the US have taken. And what was eventually put on the table - TTIP - was a complete turd that threatened public services and now looks to be dead in the water.

I really do pity people who are desperate for their own country to fail because it'll give them a chance to say "I told you so".

What's worse though? Hoping for economic instability, or voting for it?

 

[Redfox]

We're out, it's done, so we move on!

 

[mnb089mnb]

We're out, it's done, so we move on!

UK is still a member of the EU.

 

[Redfox]

UK is still a member of the EU.

Erm ok then, we are heading out. That better?

 

[Matt_]

Brexit will end up destroying the conservatives over the next 3-4 years

We can but hope.

There might not currently be a viable alternative in the view of some, but the alternative of perennial Tory government will see damage done to the NHS and the Welfare State that the country can never recover from.

The problem is some people won't see it until it's too late.

 

[Captain Scumbag]

What's worse though? Hoping for economic instability, or voting for it?

The former. Hoping for economic instability, especially when the main motivation is merely a vain desire to be proven right, is shallow and imbecilic. Voting for something despite knowing it will entail a period of economic instability may be quite reasonable, especially if one believes (correctly or not) that it will be transitory and worth the long-term benefits that will come with the change.

There's more to politics than economic stability. It's rather dispiriting, especially on a generally left-leaning forum, that the resident pro-capitalist, Tory-voting tosspot is the one pointing that out.

 

[silkyman]

The EU has repeatedly proven itself to be pretty poor at negotiating trade deals precisely because it's a cumbersome organisation with competing interests. Look how long negotiations with the US have taken. And what was eventually put on the table - TTIP - was a complete turd that threatened public services and now looks to be dead in the water.

I really do pity people who are desperate for their own country to fail because it'll give them a chance to say "I told you so".

Why do you think I want the UK to fail? I'm worried it might. I dont want to blindly stumble into the future. I was pointing out that it will be entirely possible to compare the 'in and out' deals.

 

[Destruction]

The former. Hoping for economic instability, especially when the main motivation is merely a vain desire to be proven right, is shallow and imbecilic. Voting for something despite knowing it will entail a period of economic instability may be quite reasonable, especially if one believes (correctly or not) that it will be transitory and worth the long-term benefits that will come with the change.

There's more to politics than economic stability. It's rather dispiriting, especially on a generally left-leaning forum, that the resident pro-capitalist, Tory-voting tosspot is the one pointing that out.

Nah fuck that, I can't wait for places like Sunderland and Wales to get their new cut of the profits when it's all decided inside No 10 by a Tory government.

Good luck lads.

 

[mnb089mnb]

The former. Hoping for economic instability, especially when the main motivation is merely a vain desire to be proven right, is shallow and imbecilic. Voting for something despite knowing it will entail a period of economic instability may be quite reasonable, especially if one believes (correctly or not) that it will be transitory and worth the long-term benefits that will come with the change.

There's more to politics than economic stability. It's rather dispiriting, especially on a generally left-leaning forum, that the resident pro-capitalist, Tory-voting tosspot is the one pointing that out.

I didn't say economic stability was the only (or even main) issue.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

It would be wrong to think that membership of the EU is a golden ticket to economic stability though, as we see currently with Germany and Deutsche Bank.

Widespread German press reports about either possible German government bail outs, and/or talks on a merger with Commerzbank, which is already part state owned, to create one mammoth bank that can pool capital.

Deutsche Bank holds assets worth 50% of Germany's economy, it's hugely important that it stays viable. However It's shares have hit 30 year lows this week and it's just had to sell Abby Life for 1.2Bn (a loss of 800m) to raise cash. The IMF now rank it as "the worlds riskiest bank" - but do not think state intervention is required just yet. It's a delicate situation.