Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[pig]

Just heard this on the radio. After a 'consultation' of the public Rees-Mogg has finally come up with a list of Brexit Benefits.

None of these of course been selected purely to make Tory donors and corporate interests happy at the expense of the public thereby making Brexit seem like a big con 

Quote

1. Encourage fracking, shortcut rules on planning consultation via emergency act.
2. Abolish the EU regulations that restrict vacuum cleaner power to 1400 watts.
3. Remove precautionary principle restrictions (for instance) on early use of experimental treatments for seriously ill patients and GM crops.
4. Abolish rules around the size of vans that need an operator's licence.
5. Abolish EU limits on electrical power levels of electrically assisted pedal cycles.
6. Allow certain medical professionals, such as pharmacists and paramedics, to qualify in three years.
7. Remove requirements for agency workers to have all the attributes of a permanent employee.
8. Simplify the calculation of holiday pay (eg 12.07 percent of pay) to make it easier for businesses to operate.
9. Reduce requirements for businesses to conduct fixed wire testing and portable application testing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1618395/Brexit-news-Boris-Johnson-2000-ideas-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-suggestions-EU-rules-update

[slawek]

1 hour ago, thecrashingisles said:

From your perspective, the world needs to move towards a better and more integrated global system, but even from that perspective you can't really say in advance what counts as a wrong turn.

Hypothetically, if things develop towards World War Three around 2050 involving the European Union, the African Union, China and the North American Union, people might look back and see the development of the EU as one of the key mistakes that led to a world partitioned into competing blocs.

The EU is just a step in the right direction. What matters is the direction. Without making those steps we will not progress.

The transition from hunter-gatherers to farmers led to creation of states and bloody wars between them but nobody sane would argue we should not make that move.  

[miguel]

7 minutes ago, pig said:

Just heard this on the radio. After a 'consultation' of the public Rees-Mogg has finally come up with a list of Brexit Benefits.

None of these of course been selected purely to make Tory donors and corporate interests happy at the expense of the public thereby making Brexit seem like a big con 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1618395/Brexit-news-Boris-Johnson-2000-ideas-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-suggestions-EU-rules-update

Wow!! They really are fcked in the head!

[thecrashingisles]

9 minutes ago, slawek said:

The EU is just a step in the right direction. What matters is the direction. Without making those steps we will not progress.

The transition from hunter-gatherers to farmers led to creation of states and bloody wars between them but nobody sane would argue we should not make that move.  

Do you regard the proliferation of new states over the last few decades as a step in the wrong direction?

[slawek]

6 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

Do you regard the proliferation of new states over the last few decades as a step in the wrong direction?

It depends. If they are armed nationalistic states then it is a regression. If they are local structures within some bigger structures then it is a right direction.  In my opinion local decisions should be made on the local level but we need higher structures to manage problems on a higher level.

The current world is like a gangland within gangs (states) competing with other gangs, often using violence to get territory, control or resources. Each gang tries to keep its cohesion gathering members around leaders and symbols, using hate and other emotions.  

[kzb]

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

Rubbish.

No it's not, it was their stated aim that NI would be the price of Brexit.

[kzb]

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

Let us extrapolate that.

The UK wanted:
Out of the EU
End freedom of movement
Out of the Single Market
Out of the Customs Union
Free Trade Deal with the EU
Free to make own trade deals
 

The UK got:
Out of the EU
End freedom of movement
Out of the Single Market
Out of the Customs Union
Free Trade Deal with the EU
Free to make own trade deals
 

Waaaaaaaaaaaah, the EU is punishing us.

 

I'm happy about all that, but what we were discussing was the NI/RoI/GB border.  That does look like a solution designed by a committee does it not.   The current arrangement should be seen as only transitional, until a better solution is implemented.  That outlook is clearly represented in the NIP, but now everyone says it is permanent.

[Bob8]

1 hour ago, pig said:

Just heard this on the radio. After a 'consultation' of the public Rees-Mogg has finally come up with a list of Brexit Benefits.

None of these of course been selected purely to make Tory donors and corporate interests happy at the expense of the public thereby making Brexit seem like a big con 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1618395/Brexit-news-Boris-Johnson-2000-ideas-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-suggestions-EU-rules-update

One of those, the calculation of pay, is the ability to change to the system we already use in Denmark. 

So, not a brexit benefit. 

All others are reductions of workers' rights and safety measures.

[IMHAL]

1 hour ago, kzb said:

No it's not, it was their stated aim that NI would be the price of Brexit.

As far as the majority of NI are concerned, they don't have a problem with Brexit. In fact they have the best of both worlds.

The issue seems to me to be that the GB has a problem with NI. Was it a price worth paying? Apparetly so according to the election.

[thecrashingisles]

Interesting intervention from Tony Blair:

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2022/06/02/news/tony-blair-claims-protocol-risks-undermining-the-good-friday-agreement--2730345/

Tony Blair has labelled the Northern Ireland Protocol a “bad deal” and claimed that it risks “undermining the Good Friday Agreement”.

Mr Blair, who as British prime minister helped oversee the 1998 Good Friday Agreement negotiations, said a deal on the post-Brexit trade arrangements was “in the interests of broader European harmony and trade”, against the background of conflict in Ukraine.

He calls on “significant movement from the EU” on its current position and argues that negotiations and agreement should be led “at the highest political level” as a result of the “state of distrust” between the EU and UK.

Edited June 1, 2022 by thecrashingisles

[slawek]

22 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

Interesting intervention from Tony Blair:

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2022/06/02/news/tony-blair-claims-protocol-risks-undermining-the-good-friday-agreement--2730345/

Tony Blair has labelled the Northern Ireland Protocol a “bad deal” and claimed that it risks “undermining the Good Friday Agreement”.

Mr Blair, who as British prime minister helped oversee the 1998 Good Friday Agreement negotiations, said a deal on the post-Brexit trade arrangements was “in the interests of broader European harmony and trade”, against the background of conflict in Ukraine.

He calls on “significant movement from the EU” on its current position and argues that negotiations and agreement should be led “at the highest political level” as a result of the “state of distrust” between the EU and UK.

A very selective and manipulative quoting. That is what he wrote

"There is no escaping the following: the Northern Ireland Protocol, described at the time by Boris Johnson as an “excellent deal” that resolved all the issues around Northern Ireland, was a bad deal and didn’t resolve those issues; that this was apparent at the time to anyone studying the detail; that the UK government is now effectively in disorderly retreat from the agreement it made; and that, if left unresolved, the issues at the heart of the protocol have the capability of causing an enlarged trade conflict between the UK and the EU, or undermining the Good Friday Agreement – and quite possibly both.

That said, in the interests of broader European harmony and trade – especially at a time when Europe, including the UK, has come together impressively over Ukraine – both the EU and the UK should show maximum flexibility in order to reach an agreement.

In this paper, we set out a practical way through, one that would obviate the vast majority of checks on goods moving between Britain and Northern Ireland, provide a compromise on the involvement of the Court of Justice of the EU, and give greater opportunities for consultation on draft EU laws affecting Northern Ireland to representatives from all sides of the community. It is, at least, a possible landing zone for resolution of the dispute. It could be done within the framework of the protocol, but would require significant movement from the EU on its stated position around the protocol’s interpretation.

My judgement – with long experience of EU negotiations – is that things have reached such a state of distrust that the two bureaucratic systems will not settle this; it has to be done at the highest political level because, ultimately, it is not a matter of technical work but political will and leadership."

https://institute.global/policy/fixing-northern-ireland-protocol-way-forward

[pig]

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

One of those, the calculation of pay, is the ability to change to the system we already use in Denmark. 

So, not a brexit benefit. 

All others are reductions of workers' rights and safety measures.

Didn't catch all of the answer to it but the calculation of pay 'benefit' was something to do with reducing the amount of holiday pay and voluntary overtime.

I therefore think we're still on the purpose of Brexit as being for Tory donors (albeit laundered via the Express to appear as wanted by the public)  

 

[thecrashingisles]

3 hours ago, slawek said:

It depends. If they are armed nationalistic states then it is a regression. If they are local structures within some bigger structures then it is a right direction.  In my opinion local decisions should be made on the local level but we need higher structures to manage problems on a higher level.

The current world is like a gangland within gangs (states) competing with other gangs, often using violence to get territory, control or resources. Each gang tries to keep its cohesion gathering members around leaders and symbols, using hate and other emotions.  

Imagine if a large part of the world moves in the direction that you think it should, but ends up leaving itself open to domination by a rising power like China. Would that eventual outcome colour whether your regard the previous period as one of 'progress'?

You're very idealistic about the way the world should work, but there are two problems with basing a dogmatically pro-EU view on that: firstly it's debatable whether you are right about the end point being desirable, and secondly it's debatable whether the EU represents a move in that direction or not.

[jonb2]

19 hours ago, thecrashingisles said:

No but I'm not sure it's a helpful way of looking at the world. What counts as progress is subjective.

I wouldn't say it's a subjective measure. I would say it's how big the majority of whom say they have gained because of it. Of course, there will always be a minority of nostalgists making disproportionate noise.

For example, medicine has advanced to save many more lives and conditions. Not really subjective. The telephone, radio, email and TV has made communication much easier than a running man or pigeon. Even chalk and blackboards. The universality of education, particularly reading. Spectacles. Dentistry. The tractor. Female equality. All progressive. The existence of a legal system. Having a police force. Computers used for serious things - like posting here.

The discovery of fire.

[thecrashingisles]

2 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

I wouldn't say it's a subjective measure. I would say it's how big the majority of whom say they have gained because of it. Of course, there will always be a minority of nostalgists making disproportionate noise.

For example, medicine has advanced to save many more lives and conditions. Not really subjective. The telephone, radio, email and TV has made communication much easier than a running man or pigeon. Even chalk and blackboards. The universality of education, particularly reading. Spectacles. Dentistry. The tractor. Female equality. All progressive. The existence of a legal system. Having a police force. Computers used for serious things - like posting here.

The discovery of fire.

You're conflating technological progress with political progress. You can be objective about the discovery of electricity representing progress but people have different opinions about, say, the extinction of the Cornish language.

[zugzwang]

10 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Computers used for serious things - like posting here.

A social good. We'd all be boring someone down the pub otherwise.

😁

[dugsbody]

2 hours ago, kzb said:

No it's not, it was their stated aim that NI would be the price of Brexit.

No, it wasn't. You spread false information.

 

[dugsbody]

2 hours ago, kzb said:

I'm happy about all that, but what we were discussing was the NI/RoI/GB border.  That does look like a solution designed by a committee does it not.   The current arrangement should be seen as only transitional, until a better solution is implemented.  That outlook is clearly represented in the NIP, but now everyone says it is permanent.

Because the EU doesn't trust the UK to be negotiating in good faith, and rightly so.

[jonb2]

16 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

You're conflating technological progress with political progress. You can be objective about the discovery of electricity representing progress but people have different opinions about, say, the extinction of the Cornish language.

That's nostalgia. Nothing to do with the progress of mankind as a whole.

Like Brexit.

[pig]

4 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Because the EU doesn't trust the UK to be negotiating in good faith, and rightly so.

Johnson came up with something to differentiate himself from May to get elected.

The swivel-eyed loons installed Johnson because they thought he'd be the best sales-person to sell swivel-eyed loonery - they still do and are currently having kittens over their dilemma.

This ultimately all has very little to do with the EU other than the somewhat understandable demand that they bail Johnson out or else NI explodes.

 

[slawek]

17 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

Imagine if a large part of the world moves in the direction that you think it should, but ends up leaving itself open to domination by a rising power like China. Would that eventual outcome colour whether your regard the previous period as one of 'progress'?

You're very idealistic about the way the world should work, but there are two problems with basing a dogmatically pro-EU view on that: firstly it's debatable whether you are right about the end point being desirable, and secondly it's debatable whether the EU represents a move in that direction or not.

That is how the UK works on a smaller scale, many nations inside one bigger structure. Do you consider the UK to be very idealistic? Do you think this arrangement is less desirable than a situation when England, Scotland and Wales fight each other as separate states? 

There is no doubt that the EU contributed to stability and peace in Europe. You said that yourself in the past. It is then a step in the right direction as it allows its members to work together and resolve conflicts through a discussion. The EU creates an idea of a common good, still imperfect but better than none.

Let me repeat once again. It is not about the EU. The EU is just a step in the right direction. So don't consider my views as dogmatically pro-EU. The EU needs to change and to be ultimately replaced by something better.  

[Bob8]

18 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

No, it wasn't. You spread false information.

He is part right, I think.

Like not being able to be in the single market if you leave the single market, that us breaking the Good Friday agreement would mean we had broken the Good Friday agreement was part of Project Fear.

[thecrashingisles]

4 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

That's nostalgia. Nothing to do with the progress of mankind as a whole.

Like Brexit.

So you’d be in favour of a single global language?

[kzb]

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

Because the EU doesn't trust the UK to be negotiating in good faith, and rightly so.

But you trust the EU to negotiate in good faith?  You don't think the shining beacon of truth could be using the NI border because they are intrinsically more honest than us ?

[miguel]