Sure, but a week is a long time in politics. Let’s see if Labour can avoid committing to another referendum….
They have avoided saying anything meaningful for the last 2 years almost so another week won’t be too hard.
in any event any vote will be too late. The “deal” needs to be agreed in October for ratification in the member states. So let’s say a deal is reached then put to Parliament, the organisation of a vote takes place obviously avoiding Christmas, we have a vote in jan? For what reason? So politicians can blame the public and wash their hands.
If you are a member state why would you devote any effort to ratification until we have all our cards on the table and our house in order?
If you are a member state why would you devote any effort to ratification until we have all our cards on the table and our house in order?
Because, they will not be ratifying a deal on our future relationship at all, they'll just be approving the transition really… which is where we pay our way, do as we're told, and give up our seat at the table. No reason to vote against that, if the EU pin us down to a withdrawal agreement that means we stick to the rules, but don't set them, while the can kicking continues.
I see trollhurtmore has posted 15 times in the last 15 hours,a pretty sad way for a city highflyer to spend his weekend,mind you tutors in minor public schools have lots of spare time at weekends,don't they ?
Minor?? How very dare you. That's so rude...
I can't help but thinking THM responses are an adult version of the play school retort of "I know you are, you said you are but what am I?"
Ok,very minor !!
Because, they will not be ratifying a deal on our future relationship at all, they’ll just be approving the transition really…
as I understand it we are negotiating for the final deal not what happens in the transition. I thought that was agreed we stop paying, still complying with the rules with movement of good stuff etc, we can start negotiations with other countries and after 12-24 months out we pop.
we have spent 2 years to get to here. We need to engage an extra 160 odd countries so can't waist time on restarting negotiations with the EU. Even if they give a **** about us by then..
So you are now arguing that we roll over and accept the EU’s position even though that’s not the best outcome. It’s great this, everyone outing themselves as each day…
And you say people pay for your flawed comprehension and misrepresentation....
The UK doesn't get to choose, we get to agree and say thank you. We can't get a better deal than the one we have.
Yes, you only get the free version. But puzzling, when you conclude with a sentence that makes sense, why precede it with one that doesn't at all?
Makes perfect sense to me - what are you struggling with, THM?
Yeh I wondered that. It’s perfectly clear what Mike meant to communicate.
The bit that's untrue
Oh wise one you are so gnomic and inscrutable. We are truly honoured to have such an intellectual giant amongst us.
The bit that’s untrue
That wasn't what you said, though, was it? You make obfuscation an art form - I presume that's at least partly because you're aware how weak your argument is.
Correct - I referred to the bit that didn't make sense. It didnt make sense latgely because it was untrue.
capn, nothing to the privilege of being in the middle of literary and comic genius
OK so it is untrue. The UK does have a choice,
But then so does a condemned man when asked to choose between the firing squad or the gallows!
EDIT: Plus, if you don't fancy execution, there is the cliff, feel free to jump..
That wasn’t what you said, though, was it? You make obfuscation an art form – I presume that’s at least partly because you’re aware how weak your argument is.
I'm beginning to think he's actually a politician. All filler, no killer.
We can’t get a better deal than the one we have.
Precisely. But the electorate weren't aware of that when they voted, and some may have changed their mind as a result. If they are asked again, and enough have changed their mind, (or not) that's democracy as currently defined. I'd much prefer that our democratically elected Government (or Parliament, either will do) actually did the job they were elected to do, realised that we're flying into an avoidable crash and took evasive action themselves but, if they insist on running the country by referendum, we need another one.
Bob and that started so well and then you blew it 😏
as I understand it we are negotiating for the final deal not what happens in the transition
But, @cornholio98, you talked about ratification before we leave… only the withdrawal agreement can be ratified before march next year… a new "bespoke FTA" will take years… so, unless a wise politician asks to extend our membership… or we take an off the shelf option… all that can be ratified before we leave is the withdrawal deal… we're no longer members… but negotiations with the EU on our new relationship carry on, with them having the upper hand because either…
a) transition period is agreed and entered into, we're playing by their rules, to keep market access as it currently is, but we're the nodding dog in the room… no say over anything… and the EU has control over when transition ends
b) a disorderly exit happens, meaning we need trade deals yesterday, and new trade deals with every other trading block in the world still won't come close to matching what we'd have lost in Europe… or at least that's what our government's people say
The withdrawal agreement is supposed to include a vague idea of what we will be transitioning to… but it is not a FTA, or any other form of agreement as to the rules and conditions of our new relationship that we are to transition to. All that has to be hammered out over the years… and the UK government has had to deliberately avoid stating the direction it want this to go in, because it knew that no direction is more popular than continued membership, and any direction they chose would be opposed by a significant proportion of those who campaigned and voted to Leave. As has happened.
The only way to Leave was to set out what relationship we want, affirm this with "the people", with a referendum, then start preparations for both the agreed direction and for a no deal scenario… and then, when we knew we had a plan for both of those outcomes, knew the timescales (roughly) and the government had a direction for its own people to be pushing for… trigger A50 and begin negotiations.
Untrue on several counts. First the referendum was about membership of the EU not how we may or may not secure access to the single market. Membership of the EU and the SM are inseperable. Of course many have deliberately chosen to confuse the issue in order to obstruct the result. Second the U.K. giov set out it’s objectives twice in 2017 including both the defensive and offensive interests. Anyone can assess these interests and objectives against the various off the shelf options for accessing the single market. Hence we know exactly what the negotiating points are against the existing options. Tables summarily these issues have been posted here several times.
Since then our internal fights have meant that we have weakened our position in relation to some of these interests as part of negotiations. We have made the chances of securing an attractive FTA more difficult as a result
There will never be a consensus on the final agreement in exactly the same way that there was never a consensus on the form of our membership throughout its history. Of course obstructiers ignore this deliberately so that they can split the leave vote and distort the process. So far they have done a pretty good job of it too
Membership of the EU and the SM are inseperable.
That's not correct.
Norway is *not* in the EU, and had a referendum to confirm that - they rejected joining the EU because it was too right-wing for their tastes.
But Norway *is* in the SM.
Of course many have deliberately chosen to confuse the issue in order to obstruct the result.
No we are just trying to stop the UK leaving the eu. No need to confuse things there.
Of course obstructiers ignore this deliberately so that they can split the leave vote and distort the process. So far they have done a pretty good job of it too
Until I can hear 2 leavers come up with the same vision I'll leave them to it. No need to try a d split them they were shattered from the day of the result.
But if whatever you think we are doing is working then we shall continue.
No there is a difference between being members and having access to the SM.
Your motives are very clear mike are the means - pages of evidence ^
still Salzburg meetings this weekend look like another step towards a fudge - unless this is another bluff and the SDs close to 20% in Sweden
split the leave vote
Genuine LOLs here. When are the tories going to come up with a credible plan that they can agree on? The brexiteers have just pulled their alternative to chequers cos even they realised it was laughable. That's before you even consider the alternative labour, erm, "vision" for brexit.
Most of the brexit visions from the true believers need the daffy duck gif to realise how the faithful read them.
Are you the peoples front of..... And so on.
In fact what has the eu ever done for us
Since then our internal fights have meant that we have weakened our position in relation to some of these interests as part of negotiations.
As I said, those "internal fights" needed to be resolved, arriving at a decision, which then could be approved by "the people", before we triggered A50… instead, we're just running down the clock, putting the UK in… how can I put this… the shit.
Tick. Tock.
There will never be a consensus on the final agreement
THM,, how can there ever be a consensus when apparently intelligent people such as yourself are so concerned with addressing those who disagree with you as:
Remoaners
Undemocrats
Obstructiers
Many people, myself included, wish only the best outcome for the UK and our freinds in Europe. The 27 EU nations did not suddenly become my adversaries in June 2016.
If and when the UK government presents a proposal I can believe in then I will support it. Until then I will do what I can for the best outcome for all.
Which faction of the governing party are we supposed to unite behind to avoid falling into one of the categories above?
Very well said littledave
I'm slightly bemused that 1400 pages seem to be about financial industries and almost nothing about anyone else who works.
Work wise I'm focussing on the US, South America, SE Asia and the Antipodes. None of those new workstreams are going to bring significant employment to the UK. They will bring revenue back, but that's not going to help people doing jobs that won't exist after we've dropped out of the EU next March.
I’m slightly bemused that 1400 pages seem to be about financial industries and almost nothing about anyone else who works.
I've read most of it.... We covered most things but thm's schrodinger bankers keep coming back.
its all gonne be fine, weve got the potential of a 'soviet era economy' to look forward to
split the leave vote
The 'splitting' of leavers was absolutely inevitable, because there are multiple groups of leavers wanting quite different things. Some want hard Brexit, some soft. So whichever ends up being on the cards, the other group will hate it. We tried to tell THM this, that we weren't voting for an actual plan, but he kept saying it was simple.
It's definitely not simple - that fact alone and its consequences demonstrates this.
Im not sure how THM can blame us remoaners for splitting the leave vote?
we can complain bitterly & laugh & point at the stupidity of the brexiteers, but that doesnt change the fact that none of them have a coherent plan:
they are quite happily split between those that favour the chequers deal (because they are too ashamed to admit that no deal is a disaster & theyve nothing better to offer) Gove, leadsome, Fox,
& the frothing eu haters like mogg, redwood, davis that seem to want a chaotic no deal
& then of course Borris famously wrote those 2 letters, hes obviously split (tho not really it was always about a path to no10 for him, brexit was just a means to an end)
No there is a difference between being members and having access to the SM.
No-one is threatening our place in the Single Market.....
Long time listener, first time caller
I love this thread.
I'm a bit bemused by THM's position, though.
Given that you voted Remain, presumably because you believed it would be the best outcome...
Given that you have now rallied yourself behind Leave because you are a democrat...
Given that you now find yourself forced to defend a Leave position because you are a democrat...
Do you still think it would be damaging to the democratic process to revisit the original question?
Given your stated starting position it is baffling that you have taken such a contrary stance to what is, hyperbole notwithstanding, quite a reasonable opposition.
It is difficult to understand your position outside of it being a game to you.
It is difficult to understand your position outside of it being a game to you.
Nail. Head.
Kimbers and mol - I am no doing what you claim. Both sides are spilt on their visions of life as members or non-members of the EU. True. Remember there are those still even arguing for membership of the Euro despite the havoc this has reeked. Talk about charging ahead without a plan!!! My argument is indeed simple - you cannot technically split one side of the vote (e.g. in a second referendum) while artificially presenting an single alternative. Unless of course you are merely trying to distort the voting process. Yes, mol, we have gone through this before. We have many minority positions that loosely align themselves to remain or leave but are in no way consistent on either side. Hence the narrowness of the actual result.
oldandpastit - We voted to end membership of the EU and therefore membership of the single market. Some do view that as a threat, hence they are negotiating our future access as a non member.
Vaz
1. Yes
2. Haven't rallied round, merely accepted that the majority of voters wanted a different outcome to me.
3. Don't defemd. You are confusing this with rejecting/falsifying lies promoted by those who seek solely to reject/obstruct the result.
4. Yes. Oddly enough find myself in agreement with the head of the RMT on that one.
5. Not baffling. Argue your case, accept the result, move on.
6. It's not a game which is why (5) and why we are prepared for the next phase. That's what business does.
It’s not a game which is why (5) and why we are prepared for the next phase. That’s what business does.
Businesses will move to the most advantageous location as has been seen by the outflow of manufacturing and pharmaceutical bodies. Investment banks will treat it like a game and play the numbers for profit. Trouble is next time they screw up the coffers will be empty so no bailouts
there are those still even arguing for membership of the Euro
Really ? I'm not aware of anyone on here, or in the remain camp or infant t anywhere in UK politics arguing for this !
I am aware of the Tories being in civil war over what form they want brexit to take & that split has fallen along the same lines it has for years
Oh look it's a Eurosquirrel.
THM has predicted eight of the last zero collapses of the Euro. Quite the soothsayer. His posts reek of something, but I wouldn't say it was havoc.
One of your more valuable posts captain. Bravo
any reason why you limited your point to the Tories kimbers?
oldandpastit – We voted to end membership of the EU and therefore membership of the single market.
Nowhere on the ballot paper did it mention the single market.
We could go Norway plus and still not be a member of the EU.
Correct zippy it didn’t. You needed to do the research - if not, according to many ^, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote. So be careful, you may get excluded..,
