Brexit again

[Jetpilot]

4 minutes ago, coldel said:

Yes she did the right thing, but she should have done it last week instead of putting the House through a weeks worth of debate only to pull it at the last minute. It was obvious from the off that the backstop agreement was not fully understood and needed clarification.  I am hoping that the EU and TM put some practicalities around the backstop procedure so its clear we cannot be indefinitely tied to the EU. 

 

More bluster from the SNP etc this morning, so many raised voices but not a single one has actually lent anything useful to the issue in terms of 'whats the alternative to the backstop'. Labour have no alternative, they just want power. Once in they will end up stuck with the same deal TM has they do not have any silver bullet that solves the NI border issue.  

 

I really enjoy following politics, to see how countries and the world is governed, but the last month has seen just how low some politicians can go. So many have nothing at heart aside from personal power grabbing, Corbyn couldn't care less about the economy, JRM DD et al just want a hard right bigoted Tory government. 

It does make you question how the Scottish independence vote would have worked with regards to borders and them wanting to stay in the EU, dont the SNP have an answer from their vote?

[coldel]

10 minutes ago, Jay84 said:

So we're getting a divorce but have children with shared custody?!?

Well its a useful analogy but not 100% correct. We had contractual obligations to pay to the EU, we took off the EU payments to us and we ended up where we did. Yes we pay in more, but by supporting the blocs growth we make it more powerful and negotiate better deals with other blocs which ultimately benefit us. You can blame successive governments for this position, not just the Tories. 

 

We could walk away, pay nothing, but then how would expect any future trade partner to work with us given that we have demonstrably shown we are not good for our debts? It would hugely weaken our ability to create new trade deals, we would be a bad debtor on the world stage.

[ATTAK Z]

Did anyone see Jeremy Vine on 5 this morning, Anne Widdecombe in particular ?

[coldel]

8 minutes ago, ATTAK Z said:

Did anyone see Jeremy Vine on 5 this morning, Anne Widdecombe in particular ?

Nope, my morning consists of a 6am alarm, sorting out child, getting ready, being in the office for 8am  Will need a summary...

[ATTAK Z]

 

[coldel]

What I would take out of that:

• Widdecombe is symptomatic of the lack of understanding of what no deal means and its implications and why putting it on the table so flippantly is so dangerous
• Jones is right that we cannot just cancel the referendum result as it would undermine the choices people in this country make at the voting booths
• Ireland is ready to blow again, and it was pointed out 1000s of people died in a bloody conflict, some politicians are sweeping this under the carpet and Widdecombes complete lack of ability to understand this with her comment 'oh is that all it is then' shows why people like her shouldn't be anywhere near a decision making position

[coldel]

We have had quite a lot of misunderstandings and misquotes through the whole process - ironic that even the word Brexit doesn't contain NI (as in Great Britain Exit) and NI is now the central focus of the whole thing. The idea that we leave with No Deal and somehow the UK is sovereign is something the likes of the ERG will not give the full facts about - joining the WTO is not going to give us free reign to do whatever we want, we are still bound by their rules instead of the EUs, we will still have restrictions in place as to how we trade with other nations and blocs. 

 

It just seems this whole debate from 2015 to now seems to only focus on the present and not the future, the WTO is not a wonderful restriction free place to trade in. It might be a nasty wake up call for people if we do end up there. 

[coldel]

I would also add that Widdecombe is also grossly over stating how businesses are set up for no deal, you cannot just 'stockpile' and although some have, many cannot. What does she propose for that? Can businesses afford to stockpile? What about smaller businesses who are less cash fluid? It was such a stupid throw away comment to a complex question again shows how little she is equipped to properly propose a no deal.

[docwra]

Nobody seems to appreciate that most businesses run at a very tight retained profit, maybe 1-2% of turnover, if youre seeing 5% youre doing very well. 

 

If your costs rise by a number greater than your retained profit you will eventually go bust, no question. Now consider how many companies will go to the wall overnight if we get WTO tariffs on their imports and exports, if their cost of employment increases due to lack of immigrant workers, if their transport costs increase, if GBP drops another 5% against EUR and USD .........

Also keep in mind that in the event of "No Deal" the Irish border will immediately be reinstated, expat Brits living in EU almost certainly wont get free medical treatment or be able to draw their pensions and there would almost certainly be a huge exodus of EU workers and most international businesses will move the operations to Ireland or the Netherlands (I have  already planned for this, £13m will be going into the Irish economy next year) ........ and people still want to vote for this? Are you actually ****ing mad or have you just not been listening for the last 2 years?

 

If big Theresa can go back to the EU and using the threat of Noo Deal (which Im still not entirely sure will damage the EU *that* much) get an end date to backstop then it might just work but as someone else said, the EU want us to stay, they dont need to negotiate any further. 

 

[coldel]

As above, most supermarkets/grocers operate at a gross margin of 1%-4% (despite what the Daily Mail might say about them ripping off customers) if their costs go up 10% so do all their prices they simply cannot afford to absorb the cost - which is to my point around stockpiling Widdecombe made, how do you stockpile? It costs money, there is finite stock space, some products are perishable and have short expiry dates - her comment on this is absurd as it is stupid.

 

The main challenges for WTO membership as I read it are:

 

• Lack of coverage of services - things like Air Travel is not covered, companies wishing to operate in a free trade area will have to relocate to Ireland or the EU mainland. Financial services are also not covered, this is a sector that effectively funds the UK, what do we do with that?
• No preferred country status - so what goes for us must go for everyone else. If we decide to trade check free with the EU on say food products? To keep trade flowing? Under no preferred country status that means we have to agree to the same with any country in the WTO so we are forced to accept products under the same rules from ANY country in the world which would no doubt result in quality issues and economic impact on local business
• Making deals with trade blocs - we have come away from dealing with the EU bloc bloodied and bruised. How do you think we will fair dealing with the US, or China, let along with Pacfici region trade blocs? Our future deals will be heavily regulated, yes it would be OUR deal but it doesn't mean they would be good ones
• How do we adjust to losing the EU trade free area - we are not going to pop to the US, have a chat, sign a deal. It is likely to take 5-10 years whereas our free trade with the EU stops much sooner, how do we navigate the imminent loss of EU trade in the mean time, which politicians have a sensible answer?

[glrnet]

2 hours ago, coldel said:

What I would take out of that:

• Widdecombe is symptomatic of the lack of understanding of what no deal means and its implications and why putting it on the table so flippantly is so dangerous
• Jones is right that we cannot just cancel the referendum result as it would undermine the choices people in this country make at the voting booths
• Ireland is ready to blow again, and it was pointed out 1000s of people died in a bloody conflict, some politicians are sweeping this under the carpet and Widdecombes complete lack of ability to understand this with her comment 'oh is that all it is then' shows why people like her shouldn't be anywhere near a decision making position

And this is where she should've stayed, panto is all she's good for http://www.harlequintheatre.co.uk/news/ann-widdecombe-quick-steps-into-panto/

[Adrian@TORQEN]

 

 

[coldel]

There has been requests in the house that Corbyn call for it too.

 

To be honest TM has been a weak leader, but, she is only in this position due to the people she put in charge failing quite miserably to fulfill a proper exit deal for the country, thats you Mr David Davis, he shouldnt be allowed near parliament and the public should be castigating him. 

 

So she ended up having to do this in 6 months instead of 2 years whilst fending off leadership challenges on a daily basis. Instead of support she has had to put up with in-party bickering. 

 

So we are where we are. Would anyone have done it any better? Well David Davis tried and failed badly. Could Labour, well I dont think Corbyn would have done any better. 

 

TMs failures as I see it have been literally the weak decision making throughout her reign, be it from declining a TV debate that led GE failure to the poisonous reliance on the DUP all the way to her lack of reaction to clear and unequivocal feedback that the backstop will not be accepted. 

[docwra]

1. Who is Beth Rigby?

2. If the ERG are who I think they are then they have got it wrong repeatedly in the last few weeks. 
3. 48 is still only 15% of the conservative party, the other 75% must realise a change of leader right now would be disastrous 
4. Do you have any opinions of your own?
 

 

 

[ATTAK Z]

3 minutes ago, docwra said:

3. 48 is still only 15% of the conservative party, the other 75% must realise a change of leader right now would be disastrous 
 

???

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Just now, docwra said:

1. Who is Beth Rigby?

2. If the ERG are who I think they are then they have got it wrong repeatedly in the last few weeks. 
3. 48 is still only 15% of the conservative party, the other 75% must realise a change of leader right now would be disastrous 
4. Do you have any opinions of your own?
 

 

 

1. Senior political correspondent for SkyNews

4. No. Not in here. Not on this topic. 

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Just now, ATTAK Z said:

???

75+15=100

 

What's wrong with that!? 

[docwra]

Sorry, 85%

Fair answer on the opinions as well

 

 

[ATTAK Z]

Just now, docwra said:

Sorry, 85%

Fair answer on the opinions as well

 

 

Are you working with the abbotomus ? 

[Adrian@TORQEN]

1 minute ago, docwra said:

Sorry, 85%

Fair answer on the opinions as well

 

 

Can you even imagine how hard it is for me to keep my mouth shut on this?    

[Ekona]

Why though? I don’t understand why someone who this would seriously affect doesn’t feel comfortable sharing those opinions on here, it’s not like you’re a newbie who we’d tear to shreds  

[Kieran O'Quick]

If there was a remain vote in a second referendum why would Europe want a country back in the fold that are only a coin toss away from leaving again? Surely that is an instability they could do with excising before it spreads. 

 

I completely agree with all the economic arguments in the previous posts. But the people who vote against you really don't give a sheet. Any ideas what can be offered to the people who have a vote and don't like the way their world is going? 

 

Because at the moment they're getting told to be worried about rich women not getting paid enough, transgender being so important and race is an issue again even though it was all cleared up years ago. 

 

So what do you tell them?

Edited December 11, 2018 by Kieran O'Quick

[Maggz]

15 hours ago, Jetpilot said:

Good point If we were actually divorcing them and leaving without anything (hard brexit) we would be discussing the settlement figure only (as per a divorce), but we are trying to form a business deal with them, two very different things.

Exactly. It's a shame other people don't come to this same realisation. 

It's a hard Brexit or it won't be a Brexit. So we have to accept the pound tanking, we have to go to WTO tariffs and we have to accept potentially a decade or a few of hard work to reach the point where we're at. 

Or accept that all that was not what people voted for. People voted for an easy leave, fast trade deals with partners like US, Australia, Canada, less money paid to the EU, and reinvesting (some or none or all) to NHS.

[Maggz]

3 hours ago, Kieran O'Quick said:

If there was a remain vote in a second referendum why would Europe want a country back in the fold that are only a coin toss away from leaving again? Surely that is an instability they could do with excising before it spreads. 

 

I completely agree with all the economic arguments in the previous posts. But the people who vote against you really don't give a sheet. Any ideas what can be offered to the people who have a vote and don't like the way their world is going? 

 

Because at the moment they're getting told to be worried about rich women not getting paid enough, transgender being so important and race is an issue again even though it was all cleared up years ago. 

 

So what do you tell them?

What do you mean? The whole continent is scratching their heads trying to understand the leave vote. Saying we're staying would be more of a "finally you're making sense". 

People on the continent don't understand the decision and hate. And Hungary, and Poland are not Europe, just a part of it with very unique leadership at this moment.

[coldel]

Looks like there will be a vote sooner rather than later...