Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Iain_For

Matt_L wrote: »

As a person that voted leave im starting to warm to the idea of a second referendum on the deal. I was dead against it but the more I hear leading remainers assuring us all that this isn't a rerun of the original referendum and in fact they totally respect the original vote and outcome, the more I believe the path we choose is ours to again vote on.

So with that, the only possible question on the ballot paper ( if we're all being honest) can be.. Accept what deal May gets or leave with no deal??? This im sure should finally satisfy everyone.

No deal means that from 29/3/19 everything stops, all the current treaties cease as clearly set out in Article 50 and the country is in the horrible position where it will be years before we have any useful trade deals that might help rebuild the UK economy. Why would you vote for that?

buglawton

Let's not forget that Turkey is part of a European customs union for goods. Needless to say there are treaties regarding air travel etc too. Notably there is no FOM. The UK's leadership could have opted for this straightforward deal as a template once it realised the the EU is going to be steadfastly stubborn on offering any other extras, which include services. Since this template already exists and is working just fine, it's hard for either side to find excuses not to make this happen by 29th March.

Such a deal will of course jettison export of financial services for the time being. Small sacrifice when compared with the NI problem.

The snub May received yesterday is the clearest signal yet of the EU leaderships 'steadfastly stubborn' message. The British cabinet now has only one simple task to complete before March 29th.

Herzlos

The Turkey option was ruled out in the handy chart the EU gave us at the start, because it violates Mays red lines, since it requires Turkey follow EU laws related to manufacture and trade, and defer to the ECJ.

It's been clear from the start we don't get a special deal. If we pick an existing deal early enough we can make a few tweaks. I don't think services is an option if we're outside the EEA. We could have the Turkey deal in weeks if she could get it past her Brexiteer rebels.

Let's also be realistic; if the tables were turned we'd have been at least as stubborn.

buglawton

Interesting point there, now I truly wonder how the ECJ applies to Turkey regarding human rights.

Anyway, looks like May picked the wrong red lines.

For Turkey its deal was designed as a stepping stone in, for the UK it would be the stepping stone out.

Lornapink

Time to sack May and go forward with either Canada+ or WTO. Hammond ought to be positing slashing corporation tax. The £39bn needs to come off the table.

I see Chuka Ummuna has spent last few days in Salzburg colluding with EU to engineer a second referendum. I struggle to think of any more devious an action.

I think the tide has turned on Remain big time, I had radio on in background all day yesterday and heard one Remainer after another declaring they're now a Leaver due to EU's attitude. Who wants to be part of a club like that?

Lornapink

Labour will be making a fatal error if it now effectively sides with the EU bullies by endorsing a second referendum which is precisely what EU leaders want.


It's not in the British psyche to be pushed around.

mayonnaise

Lornapink wrote: »

Time to sack May and go forward with either Canada+ or WTO. Hammond ought to be positing slashing corporation tax. The £39bn needs to come off the table.

I see Chuka Ummuna has spent last few days in Salzburg colluding with EU to engineer a second referendum. I struggle to think of any more devious an action.

I think the tide has turned on Remain big time, I had radio on in background all day yesterday and heard one Remainer after another declaring they're now a Leaver due to EU's attitude. Who wants to be part of a club like that?

We've been telling you for the past few years that the EU will not allow the internal market or customs union to be compromised in order to accommodate a deal with the UK.
You kept telling us they'd be falling over themselves to give us the sweetest deal as it's in their interest.
German - and other EU manufacturers were supposed to force Merkel et al into giving the UK all it wants.
Because we're so important. And Prosecco. And Mercs.
Are you finally starting to see the light?

mayonnaise

Lornapink wrote: »

Labour will be making a fatal error if it now effectively sides with the EU bullies by endorsing a second referendum...

That's your opinion.
As always, far removed from what's actually going on in the real world.

Labour could surge towards winning power if they backed new referendum, two new polls find

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-back-second-referendum-gain-power-general-election-polls-a8547676.html

Tromking

Lornapink wrote: »

Time to sack May and go forward with either Canada+ or WTO. Hammond ought to be positing slashing corporation tax. The £39bn needs to come off the table.

I see Chuka Ummuna has spent last few days in Salzburg colluding with EU to engineer a second referendum. I struggle to think of any more devious an action.

I think the tide has turned on Remain big time, I had radio on in background all day yesterday and heard one Remainer after another declaring they're now a Leaver due to EU's attitude. Who wants to be part of a club like that?

I agree with most of this. Brits don't take well to their leaders being humiliated in the fashion TM was yesterday, even someone as intrinsically useless as she is.
I sense a growing anger and impatience among the public that the negotiations are going badly and sooner or later something has to give.
The machinations in Salzburg yesterday reminded me just why I voted to get out of the bloody EU in the first place, unelected Eurocrats pontificating about and on one occasion trolling our elected leader on social media, and in the case of the terminally domestically unpopular Macron, engaging in a bit gallic Brit baiting, always a go to tactic when a French President is tanking in the polls at home.
Time to go.

Herzlos

We don't like being embarrassed in public, sure. But is the cause here the EU in telling May what she's already been told and was common knowledge, or is it in May asking for something that's already been refused multiple times?


May is an incompetent and stubborn leader who has no power and talked herself into a corner. None of that is the fault of the EU. Why should they go against their own interests to prevent May embarrassing herself on the world stage, again?

buglawton wrote: »

Interesting point there, now I truly wonder how the ECJ applies to Turkey regarding human rights.

I'm not actually sure. I suspect a lot of violations are being ignored.

Anyway, looks like May picked the wrong red lines.

Absolutely. Mays red lines are the biggest problem in negotiating a deal. The only options that satisfy all of them are Canada/Korea or WTO.

Lornapink wrote: »

Time to sack May and go forward with either Canada+ or WTO. Hammond ought to be positing slashing corporation tax. The £39bn needs to come off the table.

The £39bn is the only thing agreed so far, it's never coming off the table if we want to maintain any kind of international reputation. It's also peanuts compared to the economic damage of Brexit so the only reason anyone cares about it is some vague feeling of 'winning' against the EU.


Why do we need to drop corporation tax? We've a large population so will struggle to run as a tax haven and our tax intake needs to increase to offset the economic damage, as all of our public services are seriously struggling with funding as it is.

I see Chuka Ummuna has spent last few days in Salzburg colluding with EU to engineer a second referendum. I struggle to think of any more devious an action.

Hows this for a more devious action: Lying about Brexit in order to drop the value of the GBP to allow your makes to make millions in shorting it.


We have no direction or mandate, so we really need a 2nd referendum to get some inertia behind *something* and to let us progress. There's nothing devious in that unless you think that asking the people is just to undermine the will of the people (which I don't understand, you can't undermine the will of the people by asking the same people what their will is).