Brexit 2020+

dougiedogg
Member
sovereignty, taking back control, making our own decisions, no more unelected bureaucrats

Some would say these are benefits

But they aren’t because:

We always had sovereignty: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-white-paper-uk-parliament-remian-sovereign-eu-membership-referendum-campaign-brussels-article-a7559556.html

Taking back control of what? What control did we not have, that we will now have? Real examples of situations where we had no control, but now we do that will actually benefit us? I can’t recall seeing one?

Making our own decisions….again, see above. What decisions could we not make that we could now make independently? And how would we do them differently now? Real examples of real decisions and how we would do them differently now?

Unelected bureaucrats….this has always been a nonsense throwaway tagline to get the gammons frothing. We have always had elected officials as our representatives in the EU:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/en/european-elections/european_elections/the_voting_system.html

What does the armco signify?

Are you asking what Armco is, or it’s relevance in the analogy?

Some would say these are benefits

Some would indeed. But they’d either have to not have paid any attention to any discussions in the last four years where we’ve explained over and over and over why everything you’ve just listed is a nonsense, or be an abject moron.

—

Because I’ve had this argument time and again.

“I want brexit because [reason].”

“But [reason] doesn’t exist / is a lie / won’t be fixed by brexit / we can have anyway / etc.”

… at this point you can do one of two things.

1/ A wise man goes “oh, I didn’t know that, thanks” and revises their opinion in light of new information. (A particularly wise man will first fact-check this new information, but we all knew that, right?)

2/ An idiot doubles down. The flow chart here then splits into three. In order of likelihood: they don’t engage and change the subject; they get angry and abusive; or they go silent and disappear (often to resurface days later with the same discredited argument).

MOAR HERRING!

Have I missed anything?

Yes you missed out the word ‘RED-’

Unelected bureaucrats….this has always been a nonsense throwaway tagline to get the gammons frothing. We have always had elected officials as our representatives in the EU:

Just to add to this, the “unelected bureaucrats” this slur refers to are the EU equivalent of Parliament’s Civil Service, only working for 28 27 countries rather than just one. There are ~33,000 “unelected bureaucrats” in the EU Commission; by way of comparison, the UK alone employs over 400,000.

Now, about that red tape…

Also, you may say that this place is an anti-Brexit echo chamber, but equally so are the areas of the web that are pro-brexit, there is a motorbike forum that I pretty much no longer post on, as the pro-brexit ramblings/send them home/I’m not racist but “darkies” rhetoric makes me reconsider whether I even want to be in the virtual company of those kinds of people.

Just to add to this, the “unelected bureaucrats” this slur refers to are the EU equivalent of Parliament’s Civil Service, only working for 28 27 countries rather than just one. There are ~33,000 “unelected bureaucrats” in the EU Commission; by way of comparison, the UK alone employs over 400,000.

we had to hire 20,000 just after the brexit vote alone

we need an extra 50,000 !!!!!!!! extra just to fill out all the customs declarations!

https://www.ft.com/content/3c1ae9bd-97e0-4131-b7e6-b4d0d5b8f4ff

Ah, here. Read this.

Is the European Union governed by ‘unelected bureaucrats’?

TL;DR:
the idea that ‘the EU is governed by unelected bureaucrats” exhibits a very strong misunderstanding of how the EU is governed,

Four years ago this would have been a reasonable, understandable argument. Many things about the EU were poorly understood by the vast majority of the population at the time, myself included. Because, why would you have any reason to know? (Reason #471 why the referendum was a bloody stupid idea, one of the most popular Google searches at the time was “what is the eu?”)

Anyone having discussions in public who is still asserting this today, they’re doing it because they want to believe it’s true. They’ve had four years to learn something, it’s now wilful ignorance.

Pah you lot and your facts 🙂

Must admit though I’m pretty sure i’ve never heard an answer to the old “well what will you be able to do after brexit that the EU is currently preventing you from doing now”.

Ironically dougiedogg is just as echoey, it’s just that the echoes are from right at the start of brexit.

I do agree N.I will most likely remain under EU regs after the 5 year period.

We all will to some degree, but yes, you even more so that side of the sea. Now, how do we help set those regs now that we’ve fully surrendered control over them in exchange for… er… um… er…

sobriety

Also, you may say that this place is an anti-Brexit echo chamber, but equally so are the areas of the web that are pro-brexit, there is a motorbike forum that I pretty much no longer post on, as the pro-brexit ramblings/send them home/I’m not racist but “darkies” rhetoric makes me reconsider whether I even want to be in the virtual company of those kinds of people.

lol it wasn’t the HUBB was it?

Ah, here. Read this.

Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the “elected” head of commission was overlooked because they didn’t like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.

Anyway this thread is full of bullshit. An example of which being the whole sale of the NHS Brexit amendment which was just a PR stunt by the SNP and Greens. The Trade Bill is purely a technical bill to manage the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements. They love it because it makes its way onto TheyWorkforYou site and suckers the idiots, who want to believe anything negative. Then we get the disaster capitalists, paymaster crap routinely discussed as a reasonable hypothesis. It really is very funny.

An example of which being the whole sale of the NHS Brexit amendment which was just a PR stunt by the SNP and Greens.

Do you mean clause 4 proposed by a Conservative MP? (See back two pages in this thread).

The Trade Bill is purely a technical bill to manage the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements.

No, it isn’t. Try again.

Shame the selling of the NHS and the lowering of food standards are prerequisites for a us trade deal. Read what the Americans have written on it

Brexit has already cost billions

It really is very funny.

You have a very strange sense of humour.

Anyway this thread is full of bullshit

Which bits specifically, other than the bit you’ve already been shown to have got wrong?

The fact that the hedge funds which backed Johnson and Leave are making billions out of no deal, and the flood of dark money from Russia into Tory coffers has nothing to do with anything, right?

Do you mean the clause proposed by a Conservative MP?

If I had I meant that amendement I wouldn’t have described as I did would I?

No, it isn’t. Try again.

It is, you can read it here.

Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the “elected” head of commission was overlooked because they didn’t like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.

… rather neatly illustrating the answer to the continual accusation over the last half a decade that it’s “undemocratic” because there’s “only one name on the ballot.” The Council (heads of state of 27/8 countries) puts forward their agreed candidate, the Parliament (democratically elected MEPs) vote on the nominee, and if the answer is “no” they go back and nominate someone else.

You can’t have it both ways, complaining that there’s only one candidate and then complaining when you find out there isn’t. These two things are mutually exclusive, pick one.

It is

Does it apply to new deals and arrangements?
When does it expire?

Is not just for “the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements“, and attempts to limit it to such were blocked (including amendments that passed before the election, and have now been removed).

Does it apply to new deals and arrangements?

Nope see Clause 2(3)

Also,

Anyone in the UK complaining about the nomination of the EU President being undemocratic either needs to take a good look at how we got our own Prime Minister or is a monumental hypocrite.

EU president – voted for by the heads of state of 28 countries and 750 MEPs democratically elected by their respective countries.

Boris – voted for by <200,000 Tory party members whose only qualification is that they’ve paid £25 for the right to do so.

Nope see Clause 2(3)

I’m not re-reading it… but my recollection is that it covers any deal or arrangement with any third party that has a deal or arrangement with the EU… so no new countries… but the deal or arrangement can take any form… it isn’t just for a “rollover” on current terms… it includes new deals and arrangements… hence calls for those that differ (and aren’t a “rollover”) to be published and voted on.

Cougar, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.

@mefty – can you please explain this…

Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the “elected” head of commission was overlooked because they didn’t like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.

From Wikipedia…

On 2 July 2019, von der Leyen was proposed by the European Council as their candidate for the office of President of the European Commission.[2][3] She was elected President by the European Parliament on 16 July, with 383 to 327 votes.[4] She will be the first woman to hold the office[106] and the first German since the Commission’s first president, Walter Hallstein.

Cougar, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.

Which bit is wrong?

In any case, even if I’ve got the process slightly out the point stands, no? You can’t complain that there’s only one candidate and then complain when there’s another one.

PrinceJohn, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.

What do you lot think about the US election and its impact on Brexit? I’m hoping a Biden win will make a no-deal less palatable, given we’ve well and truly pissed off Beijing?

Little to no difference. You need to stop thinking about the damage to business of No Deal being something that this government want to avoid. They don’t. What happens in the USA has no bearing on that.

Two benefits for you guys

The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.

We won’t have to pay into the EU recovery fund to which even the R.O.I are going to be net contributors.

Obama’s trade aims for ttip were pretty much the same as trump’s brexit trade aims

Including making $$$ out of the NHS & making sure we pay American pharma the prices they charge for the latest drugs in the USA 😬

As for unelected/unelected Ursula

She got more votes than Cummings, and Johnson seems unable to do anything without big Dom’s permission !

someone please throw a stick for dougiedogg to chase before he utters any more guff

So are we all happy the Trade Bill has got nothing to do with selling the NHS to the US?

The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.

So more unelected bureaucrats? I thought the vote for Brexit was for less of those?

The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.

And who do you think will be paying for that?

We won’t have to pay into the EU recovery fund to which even the R.O.I are going to be net contributors.

The recovery fund set up to provide loans and grants to help areas decimated by coronavirus? Like, y’know, disaster relief aid? Money that the way we’re going we might well be needing ourselves at some point? That recovery fund? The fact that we’re no longer obliged to help people who are dying is a net benefit?

Christ.

PrinceJohn, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.

Can you not explain it to me please? I have time to quickly wiki things but not time to research things like that

Aside from which, I do broadly understand it, so no amount of Googling is going to tell me what mefty is specifically objecting to.

Nor, seemingly, is mefty.

NO mefty

It’s all about preparing the ground for the us deal which means lowering food standards and selling the NHS as the Americans have made clear are prerequisites for a deal

The recovery fund set up to provide loans and grants to help areas decimated by coronavirus? Like, y’know, disaster relief aid? Money that the way we’re going we might well be needing ourselves at some point? That recovery fund? The fact that we’re no longer obliged to help people who are dying is a net benefit?

Yes thats the one, but I think it is aimed at economic recovery.

So more unelected bureaucrats? I thought the vote for Brexit was for less of those?

I wouldnt call AOs, EOs and Staff officers, unelected bureaucrats

someone please throw a stick for dougiedogg to chase before he utters any more guff

How rude 😀

It’s all about preparing the ground for the us deal which means lowering food standards and selling the NHS as the Americans have made clear are prerequisites for a deal

ROFL

Aside from which, I do broadly understand it, so no amount of Googling is going to tell me what mefty is specifically objecting to.

You don’t, could you tell me which party Von der Leyen was the Spitzenkandidat for.

My bet is within five years there is an independent Scotland and a united Ireland both in the eu

England will be an impoverished failed state

So are we all happy the Trade Bill has got nothing to do with selling the NHS to the US?

They’re not going to write into the deal YOU MUST SELL US THE NHS!

The deal will specify (as TTIP tried to do) that all services (and they will mean ALL) offered by the NHS must be opened up to competitve tender.

To find out what happens then, have a look what happened with Virgin healthcare, then multiply that by a squillion, as every single appointment or service interaction within our health system is then open to objections by corporate lawyers with bottomless pockets

Welcome to the post-Brexit future of the NHS