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

[NuBrit]

Here we are, nearly one year after the referendum and we still have no idea as to what shape Brexit will take. How can we be expected to enter into negotiations with Brussels when there is so much uncertainty and division at home, let alone the fact that we don't appear ourselves to know what we want? The last thing we need is another election, but clearly it'd also be wrong for the government to just motor ahead with a hard Brexit. I think there is something to be said for a cross-party consensus with regard to it all. Rather than just getting useless Theresa May sound bites, we need an agreement that most people can actually get behind.

[ZeroSumGame]

Airbus now laying down minimum BREXIT terms or it moves jobs.

Times.paywall

Business losing patience with the shambles.

[casual_squash]

6 minutes ago, NuBrit said:

Here we are, nearly one year after the referendum and we still have no idea as to what shape Brexit will take. How can we be expected to enter into negotiations with Brussels when there is so much uncertainty and division at home, let alone the fact that we don't appear ourselves to know what we want? The last thing we need is another election, but clearly it'd also be wrong for the government to just motor ahead with a hard Brexit. I think there is something to be said for a cross-party consensus with regard to it all. Rather than just getting useless Theresa May sound bites, we need an agreement that most people can actually get behind.

It's not multiple choice and not how our governance works hence why this hard and soft narrative was ridiculous from the get go and should have been called out as much by the Government, instead they dithered.

You cannot give choice on a stance that has to be negotiated.

Just like I don't expect to have a say on every minutia of every detail of Government policy. We elect them to do that. 

You could only give the electorate a binary choice on remaining or leaving within the EU because that's all you can present to them on a practical level. 

Just as equally there was no 'soft' or 'hard' choice in remaining in the EU. Lets be clear, remaining within the EU was not merely a status quo vote, it would have been the green-light to ever more merging with the EU. 

[pig]

9 minutes ago, NuBrit said:

Here we are, nearly one year after the referendum and we still have no idea as to what shape Brexit will take. How can we be expected to enter into negotiations with Brussels when there is so much uncertainty and division at home, let alone the fact that we don't appear ourselves to know what we want? The last thing we need is another election, but clearly it'd also be wrong for the government to just motor ahead with a hard Brexit. I think there is something to be said for a cross-party consensus with regard to it all. Rather than just getting useless Theresa May sound bites, we need an agreement that most people can actually get behind.

Its not all bad - a year later and there seems to be more awareness about the implications of Brexit.

David Davis this morning on the radio insisting everybody knew what they were getting into sounding more like a lawyer defending the small print.

You're probably right about the cross-party effort, but it's probably in Corbyns interest to let the Tories own the mess and  it might be difficult for the Tories to side-line the batshit Brexiteers anyway.

 

[pig]

14 minutes ago, casual_squash said:

It's not multiple choice and not how our governance works hence why this hard and soft narrative was ridiculous from the get go and should have been called out as much by the Government, instead they dithered.

You cannot give choice on a stance that has to be negotiated.

Just like I don't expect to have a say on every minutia of every detail of Government policy. We elect them to do that. 

You could only give the electorate a binary choice on remaining or leaving within the EU because that's all you can present to them on a practical level. 

Just as equally there was no 'soft' or 'hard' choice in remaining in the EU. Lets be clear, remaining within the EU was not merely a status quo vote, it would have been the green-light to ever more merging with the EU. 

Just having enough information to know  if leaving the EU was in the UK's interest or not or if Brexit advocates knew what they were talking about would have been enough.

Edited June 12, 2017 by pig

[casual_squash]

4 minutes ago, pig said:

Just having enough information to know  if leaving the EU was in the UK's interest or not or if Brexit advocates knew what they were talking about would have been enough.

I'm more than willing to have had it spelled out the the electorate that the EU is a shrinking market. That message certainly was not conveyed. By remaining in the EU we will be expected to contribute more and more, to presumably build more roads to no where in East Europe, whilst world trade outside the EU outpaces it. 

In 1999 our non EU trade accounted for about 40%, by 2019 it now looks set to be 60%. If the EU growth was where the action was I'd be more inclined to agree with you, but it isn't.

It's also a question of will continue to get our bang for our buck with the EU and the answer is increasingly no.  

 

 

[slawek]

14 minutes ago, pig said:

Its not all bad - a year later and there seems to be more awareness about the implications of Brexit.

David Davis this morning on the radio insisting everybody knew what they were getting into sounding more like a lawyer defending the small print.

You're probably right about the cross-party effort, but it's probably in Corbyns interest to let the Tories own the mess and  it might be difficult for the Tories to side-line the batshit Brexiteers anyway.

 

David Davis himself had no much clue how the EU works a year ago.

[jonb2]

3 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

Beyond a certain level, some things are more important than economics. Self-determination, quality of life etc.

Sure HAM, but this only works if you have competent leaders in charge of your own country. Willing to take on the major corporations and not sell all the family silver to the rest of the world. Filling their own pockets via city inputs.

Also, it would be good to see them work with a vision for the country, rather than eyeing their personal bank balance.

It seems to me, it's just the process of leaving the EU that people want - but there is nothing ecept a void beyond that. I have never heard Farage, Boris, Davies, Gove etc tell me with clear conviction of WHAT HAPPENS NEXT AFTER BREXIT. Just vague mumblings about ethereal trade deals and then quickly diverting to having our own homegrown cod and chips again.

[thecrashingisles]

17 minutes ago, pig said:

You're probably right about the cross-party effort, but it's probably in Corbyns interest to let the Tories own the mess and  it might be difficult for the Tories to side-line the batshit Brexiteers anyway.

Corbyn just has to play dumb (which won't be hard) and keep the pressure up on the Brexiteers to make the impossible possible.

[thecrashingisles]

2 minutes ago, casual_squash said:

I'm more than willing to have had it spelled out the the electorate that the EU is a shrinking market.

That's false.  It is a growing market, but obviously bringing China and related countries into the global economy has had a dramatic effect on the percentages.

The biggest mistake you make in that line of thinking is in not recognising that the UK is part of that European economy that you are disparaging.  Seen from China or Japan it just seems crazy for us to think that by detaching ourselves from the EU we gain in importance rather than being diminished by it.

[casual_squash]

7 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

That's false.  It is a growing market, but obviously bringing China and related countries into the global economy has had a dramatic effect on the percentages.

The biggest mistake you make in that line of thinking is in not recognising that the UK is part of that European economy that you are disparaging.  Seen from China or Japan it just seems crazy for us to think that by detaching ourselves from the EU we gain in importance rather than being diminished by it.

It's not false, from a world economic perspective, it's a shrinking market and that's not taking into account the demographic's of Europe which simply do not favour it. 

The EU has jumped the shark, a good deal 50 years ago doesn't make it a good deal today. 

Detaching is an extreme word, we can still trade with the EU outside the single market which I'd favour longer term as opposed to paying increasing disparaging amounts to remain in an increasingly less significant single market and integrating into a failing political union.  

The real truth is both remain and leave equally have their own pitfalls, just that the remain ones fail to get a mention.  

Edited June 12, 2017 by casual_squash

[rollover]

30 minutes ago, pig said:

Its not all bad - a year later and there seems to be more awareness about the implications of Brexit.

David Davis this morning on the radio insisting everybody knew what they were getting into sounding more like a lawyer defending the small print.

You're probably right about the cross-party effort, but it's probably in Corbyns interest to let the Tories own the mess and  it might be difficult for the Tories to side-line the batshit Brexiteers anyway.

 

And the Tories try to spread the blame.

[Riedquat]

14 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Sure HAM, but this only works if you have competent leaders in charge of your own country. Willing to take on the major corporations and not sell all the family silver to the rest of the world. Filling their own pockets via city inputs.

Sure, I don't think anyone doesn't acknowledge that our own government is a problem too. But looking longer term leaving, just as joining was, will still be the situation long after this government is gone. Making a long-term decision based on a short-term situation isn't the way to do it. In an ideal world you'd wait until the short-term situation was favourable too but unfortunately that was never going to be an option.

[thecrashingisles]

13 minutes ago, casual_squash said:

It's not false, from a world economic perspective, it's a shrinking market and that's not taking into account the demographic's of Europe which simply do not favour it. 

The EU has jumped the shark, a good deal 50 years ago doesn't make it a good deal today. 

Detaching is an extreme word, we can still trade with the EU outside the single market which I'd favour longer term as opposed to paying increasing disparaging amounts to remain in an increasingly less significant single market and integrating into a failing political union.  

The real truth is both remain and leave equally have their own pitfalls, just that the remain ones fail to get a mention.  

Again, think of it from China or Japan's perspective.  What benefit is there to negotiating trade terms with the UK in isolation?  Why should they give a toss about us?  You've just said Europe is shrinking so what's so attractive about 20% of Europe?

Edited June 12, 2017 by thecrashingisles

[jonb2]

1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

Sure, I don't think anyone doesn't acknowledge that our own government is a problem too. But looking longer term leaving, just as joining was, will still be the situation long after this government is gone. Making a long-term decision based on a short-term situation isn't the way to do it. In an ideal world you'd wait until the short-term situation was favourable too but unfortunately that was never going to be an option.

RQ - I have said this before. I voted remain simply because I saw it as the lesser of two evils. We have had nearly a century of incompetent governence. Our socio-economic situation is barely above that of Greece according to the charts I've seen.

Without the counterbalcne of the EU, we will be far more vulnerable to the American Way. It is simply an illusion to think that our recent leaders have more of an interest in the peoples of this country than getting pissed at the Commons bar during backslapping sessions with most of the landed gentry of our shepherding MSM. Then going back to one of their many homes and seeing what dodgy deal they can do next to enrich themselves.

Don't tell me we can always vote tham out for something better. If that was the case, why do we have so many more social ills in this country than many of the other countries of Europe??

It's who is running things here that is the problem. But they have been clever enough at least to enlist the misdirection of the millionaire's tame press to ruin things even further.

[Riedquat]

1 minute ago, thecrashingisles said:

Again, think of it from China or Japan's perspective.  What benefit is there to negotiating trade terms with the UK in isolation?  Why should they give a toss about us?

You think they're only interested in selling stuff to the UK if they don't have to bother doing anything extra? There's still a non-negligable market here.

[thecrashingisles]

Just now, Riedquat said:

You think they're only interested in selling stuff to the UK if they don't have to bother doing anything extra? There's still a non-negligable market here.

If the EU is becoming irrelevant, 20% of the EU is 5 times more irrelevant.

[Riedquat]

Just now, jonb2 said:

RQ - I have said this before. I voted remain simply because I saw it as the lesser of two evils. We have had nearly a century of incompetent governence. Our socio-economic situation is barely above that of Greece according to the charts I've seen.

Without the counterbalcne of the EU, we will be far more vulnerable to the American Way. It is simply an illusion to think that our recent leaders have more of an interest in the peoples of this country than getting pissed at the Commons bar during backslapping sessions with most of the landed gentry of our shepherding MSM. Then going back to one of their many homes and seeing what dodgy deal they can do next to enrich themselves.

Don't tell me we can always vote tham out for something better. If that was the case, why do we have so many more social ills in this country than many of the other countries of Europe??

It's who is running things here that is the problem. But they have been clever enough at least to enlist the misdirection of the millionaire's tame press to ruin things even further.

Well that's at least a position I can understand at last. However it's also one that means we never will solve our own problems, and also relies on the EU not going the same way.

[casual_squash]

3 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

Again, think of it from China or Japan's perspective.  What benefit is there to negotiating trade terms with the UK in isolation?  Why should they give a toss about us?  You've just said Europe is shrinking so what's so attractive about 20% of Europe?

You mean at all? I suspect you are wrong that say, Japan wouldn't trade with us as national entity because....we're too small and they couldn't be arsed?

I don't refuse to trade with market stalls because they are small and insignificant and only choose to do my shopping at Tesco, because they are large.  

That's just a ridiculous argument. 

[thecrashingisles]

1 minute ago, casual_squash said:

You mean at all? I suspect you are wrong that say, Japan wouldn't trade with us as national entity because....we're too small and they couldn't be arsed?

I don't refuse to trade with market stalls because they are small and insignificant and only choose to do my shopping at Tesco, because they are large.  

That's just a ridiculous argument. 

Of course Japanese business would trade, but trade deals at a state level are about geopolitics as much as trade and the fact is that it is the EU that counts in determining Europe's relations with the wider world.

[Steppenpig]

What's the big deal with trade deals all of a sudden (relatively) ? The EU doesn't even have trade deals with it's major global trading partners at the moment

[casual_squash]

1 minute ago, thecrashingisles said:

Of course Japanese business would trade, but trade deals at a state level are about geopolitics as much as trade and the fact is that it is the EU that counts in determining Europe's relations with the wider world.

Right but I suspect you are getting a bit carried away since you are basing Europe's significance on past glory.

Like I said as the single markets dominance shrinks globally, as will it's edge and as will our contributions to the EU see less return. If the EU were showing signs of becoming leaner and efficient again I'd be more inclined to agree. 

As per my example, the big supermarkets lately have not been saved by their sheer size, infact it's their size that's worked against them versus their smaller and more nimble competition. 

 

[jonb2]

14 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Well that's at least a position I can understand at last. However it's also one that means we never will solve our own problems, and also relies on the EU not going the same way.

That is a point I admit RQ and was aware of EU corruption when I voted.

As I said, I see the EU as a necessary counterbalance, the lesser evil to the current UK system. The principle being many heads are better than one - especially when the mouth of that one head is constantly gorging on great fork-fulls of the nation's money and neglecting to feed its family.

Edited June 12, 2017 by jonb2
spelling

[thecrashingisles]

5 minutes ago, Steppenpig said:

What's the big deal with trade deals all of a sudden (relatively) ? The EU doesn't even have trade deals with it's major global trading partners at the moment

It does have trade deals, just not fully comprehensive free trade agreements.  The EU (and therefore the UK), doesn't trade purely on WTO terms with other major economies.

[Errol]

1 hour ago, ZeroSumGame said:

Airbus now laying down minimum BREXIT terms or it moves jobs.

Times.paywall

Business losing patience with the shambles.

Should let those jobs go. No government should ever cede position to what is in effect a threat.

And, in any event, we are leaving with the next 50-100 years in mind, not the immediate or even mid-term future. 

What would be the effect of all British airlines cancelling their orders for any future Airbus aircraft? They can buy Boeing or Russian varieties.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Errol