If we vote for Brexit what happens

wotsthat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The European Commission is a third option.

So you're going to be flitting between the EU being ruled by..

- nobody because it's a collection of states that can't agree on anything
- Mrs Merkel
- the iron hand of the Commission

I do admire how you're consistently inconsistent.

wotsthat

kabayiri wrote: »

I suspect one of the main challenges the EU will have is to maintain unity between the 27 EU states during the negotiations.

It seems inevitable that there will be winners and losers.

Nigel Farage announced on LBC tonight that he plans to go on an European road tour explaining to the good people of France and Belgium etc are going to have their jobs put at risk by the EU political elite.

The guys got chutzpah, I'll give him that ! It'd be easier to be a lead balloon salesman.

There's never been unity between the EU members so to expect it during negotiations is to expect something quite unusual.

What the EU is good at is agreeing with each other. Even in areas where only a qualified majority is required they tend to be in unanimous agreement.

That's because, from the off, there will be loads of horse trading happening behind the scenes with the 'losers' looking for concessions from the 'winners'.

Similar horse trading will be happening behind the scenes in the UK although if Mrs May gets a decent majority she can pretty much do as she wishes without being held hostage by her own party or parliament and the public won't get a say until 2022.

I heard a good quote about Farage yesterday. He's given up politics because he wants to spend more time in the media.

setmefree2

Brexit: leaked documents say EU wants Britain kept under European courts

Tough draft negotiating documents demand UK meet billions in budget commitments and protect rights of Europeans citizens

Britain will have to pay off obligations to Brussels for years after Brexit, remain subject to European Union courts and continue to let relatives of European immigrants settle in the UK, according to draft EU negotiating documents.

The demands are contained in a paper, seen by Reuters, that outlines key negotiating guidelines for Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, who will launch talks on a Brexit treaty after Britain’s general election on 8 June.

The original guidelines sent to the EU’s 27 capitals on 31 March referred only to the need to “settle the status and situations” of Europeans living in Britain and Britons living in Europe.

The new draft says: “Agreeing reciprocal guarantees to safeguard the status and rights derived from EU law at the date of withdrawal of EU and UK citizens, and their families, affected by the UK’s withdrawal from the union will be the first priority for the negotiations.”

The EU has already voiced concern that British red tape is making it hard to claim rights to permanent residence after five years. The paper says there must be a “simple and swift” procedure in place that should be free or at worst no more than what Britons pay for similar public documents

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/21/leaked-documents-eu-tough-line-brexit-negotiations

Jason74

BobQ wrote: »

I voted Remain, but I confess that of all the issues in play, FoM was one I felt uncomfortable with. It may be that we cannot negotiate with the EU on the topic and have a binary choice. But I think we should explore the matter as clearly the EU will not want to upset the trading relationship we have if there is some scope to negotiate.

I agree with some of what you suggest although I think it is too rigid. I do not think it makes sense to restrict movement based on skills.

I would have no problem if those moving in either direction had to have a employment and/or sufficient funds to support themselves and their families when they are not employed. I agree that speaking English to some standard should be a requirement to come to the UK. Access to education and healthcare is an issue but provided those who come here contribute to taxation and so to the services they use I am not so bothered.

However, I also recognise that there are many in this country who see any immigration as unacceptable, others who are prejudiced against or fear certain types of immigrant and those who simply blame immigration for poor public services and taking our jobs. Some combination of these reasons was probably the clinching argument in the referendum.

Objectively, I think we need some immigration and I would like to see some kind of FoM/Trade compromise negotiated. Clearly some see that as a sell out of Brexit, but until we enhance the numbers of trained nurses, doctors and plumbers and persuade some UK workers to do the jobs that immigrants do not see as beneath them, we need some immigration.

Agree with all of this. Much as the EU rhetoric says otherwise, I am sure that there was (and possibly still is) a deal to be done whereby we stayed in the single market and accepted FoM, but with the proviso that EU migrants would have no recourse to public funds apart from the NHS and Schools (and even those only after X period of contributions).

Under that scenario, the EU can say that FoM continues, we can satisfy the need to be seen not to have people coming in and taking from the system (lets leave aside for the moment whether that is true or not). The economic disruption is also minimal, and we disentagle ourselves from the political side of "the European project". It might even be the basis of a new framework for a number of countries to participate in the single market without the political ties, leaving those who want "ever closer union" to get on with it without being held back by those wanting purely an economic relationship.

That sort of arrangement would I suspect have kept most people on either side of the remain / leave divide relatively happy, been ultimately (albeit reluctantly) palatable to the EU, and been in both the UK and wider European interest.

Instead we have shouty rhetoric on both sides, and are careering to an outcome that probably benefits nobody . . . . . .and politicians wonder why they are held in such low esteem.

Rinoa

setmefree2 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/21/leaked-documents-eu-tough-line-brexit-negotiations

Looking at what comes out of the EU on a daily basis and bearing in mind any deal has to be passed by all members, it's almost certain we'll go the WTO route.

mrginge

BobQ wrote: »

However, I also recognise that there are many in this country who see any immigration as unacceptable, others who are prejudiced against or fear certain types of immigrant and those who simply blame immigration for poor public services and taking our jobs. Some combination of these reasons was probably the clinching argument in the referendum.

Bob you really need to stop this garbage.

I've asked you before how many you think actually believe the nonsense reasons you quote. You don't seem to be able to put a figure on it.

so come on, how many people see any immigration as unacceptable?

wotsthat

mrginge wrote: »

so come on, how many people see any immigration as unacceptable?

Anyone that voted UKIP in the last election.

People of the right of the Conservative party.

A good proportion of older people.

Those who think the country is full.

Then you have to remember that being left wing doesn't preclude such views (stealing our jobs etc).

Some potential for double-counting there but I'd suggest there are millions of people who wouldn't be unhappy if immigration was zero.

mrginge

wotsthat wrote: »

Anyone that voted UKIP in the last election.

People of the right of the Conservative party.

A good proportion of older people.

Those who think the country is full.

Then you have to remember that being left wing doesn't preclude such views (stealing our jobs etc).

Some potential for double-counting there but I'd suggest there are millions of people who wouldn't be unhappy if immigration was zero.

Well I guess that's the difference between us. You like to think the very worst of anyone who disagrees with your world view, whereas I like to understand a bit more about their views and reasoning before condemning them or anyone associated with them.

Life must be so delightful when everything anyone says or does is wrong.

mayonnaise

Brexit latest: Retail sales volumes fall at fastest quarterly rate in seven years

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-retail-sales-drop-march-a7694376.html

The credit fueled consumer spending spree that has driven the so called 'brexit boom' is well and truly over.

wotsthat

mrginge wrote: »

Well I guess that's the difference between us. You like to think the very worst of anyone who disagrees with your world view, whereas I like to understand a bit more about their views and reasoning before condemning them or anyone associated with them.

Life must be so delightful when everything anyone says or does is wrong.

I condemned not a single person. I gave an honest answer to what I thought was an honest question.

I now realise it was a launchpad for your trip to the moral highground.