If there is a second referendum ...

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

We would have been much further along if the government wasn’t packed with remainers determined to keep us as closely aligned to the EU as possible.

If the government could identify a majority for anything it could ignore the remainers and get on with it.
As it is, any option is going to upset almost everyone.

BobQ

MisterMotivated wrote: »

Seamless trade. - could potentially be negotiated in a deal. Seamless trade would be in both sides' interests, but the EU insists on using it as a bargaining tool to force it's other demands upon us

Everything is so simple to you.

Seamless trade only exists within markets that share the same standards where border controls can be minimal. Once you create your own standards borders need checks, checks take time and time introduces costs.

Seamless movement. - last year, net EU-UK migration was 74,000 so I don't really see that as a good thing for a country with a chronic housing shortage already. And having to go through customs on your hen-do to Magaluf is hardly the worst thing ever

Seamless movement is not about holidays in Magaluf. Its about people crossing borders to work and do business, mutual recognition of qualifications and certificates to practice and citizens rights when working in another EU country.

Standardized goods and services. - pretty sure we can set our own standards (we could even mirror the EU's if they were suitable) without having to pay for the privilege

Standards are necessary if seamless trade and movement are to exist. UK currently influences EU standards which have a major influence on internatonal ones. Yes we can freeload on EU standards but if we are to develop our own standards our industry will still want them to be incorporated in international standards.

Developing standards is an expensive thing to do requiring a lot of professionals to develop. Who is going to pay for it?

International clout. - to do what exactly? sounds equivalent to being in a gang

To further UK interests.

Shared costs for research, defence, infrastructure. - we're paying a fortune to EDF for building Hinkley Point C through unnecessarily high strike price that will be passed on to consumers when we could've built it for half the price ourselves

.

Then why did a UK firm not bid a half the price?

I cannot believe that you are serious that sharing such costs is not
cheaper than doing these things nationally.

Shared defence spending eventually leading to an EU army over which we have no/little control

The EU Army is a misrepresentation of what the EU hopes to achieve. Its about defence cooperation on military projects which has been happening for years. An EU army requires unanimous support of the European Council.

What I will agree with you on is that when UK leaves an EU Army might be a little more likely.

BobQ

MisterMotivated wrote: »

So you want to stay in the EU because if we want to rejoin further down the line, they'll insist on us accepting terms they know we don't agree with, like adopting the disaster that is the Euro? Sounds like a great club to be a member of. And if we cancel Brexit now, what makes you think they won't take that as an opportunity to suggest some 'reforms' following our new found commintment to the bloc.

As you well know I never said this. The case for not leaving with the two Mayhem options that we presently have (the devil or the deep blue sea) stands on its own.

Enterprise_1701C

BobQ wrote: »

Everything is so simple to you.

Seamless trade only exists within markets that share the same standards where border controls can be minimal. Once you create your own standards borders need checks, checks take time and time introduces costs.



Seamless movement is not about holidays in Magaluf. Its about people crossing borders to work and do business, mutual recognition of qualifications and certificates to practice and citizens rights when working in another EU country.


Standards are necessary if seamless trade and movement are to exist. UK currently influences EU standards which have a major influence on internatonal ones. Yes we can freeload on EU standards but if we are to develop our own standards our industry will still want them to be incorporated in international standards.

Developing standards is an expensive thing to do requiring a lot of professionals to develop. Who is going to pay for it?

International clout. - to do what exactly? sounds equivalent to being in a gang

To further UK interests.

.

Then why did a UK firm not bid a half the price?

I cannot believe that you are serious that sharing such costs is not
cheaper than doing these things nationally.



The EU Army is a misrepresentation of what the EU hopes to achieve. Its about defence cooperation on military projects which has been happening for years. An EU army requires unanimous support of the European Council.

What I will agree with you on is that when UK leaves an EU Army might be a little more likely.

Our standards at least used to be ahead of the world, hence the BSI, I do not wish to come down to the tandards across the eu, have you seen some of the electrical wiring on the eu?

As for misrepresenting the eu army, did they not misrepresent the common market? If they don't score the goals they want they just move the goalposts. I do not trust anything they say.

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Equally, I find myself wondering how many leave voters did not bother turning up because everyone was convinced remain would win.

Sounds like a good reason to ask the people what they want :j

Maybe we actually are more in favour of brexit than initially thought. Maybe a referendum will cement a hard brexit?

Herzlos

MisterMotivated wrote: »

The question was: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

We voted to leave. Have we left?

No, but we've spent 2 years trying for figure out how to and failing. Charging on with something just to say they've left is madness.

Not being immediately specific about the kind of pizza you want for dinner doesn't mean you don't want a pizza. Besides, the Remoaner version seems to be more a case of:


What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.
But I want a burger. What do you want for dinner, pizza or burger?
Pizza.

Except no-one at all is advocating for a re-run of the 1st referendum.
Are you saying you'd be happy with another referendum if remain isn't on the ballot? What are you scared of?

lisyloo

Boris Johnson claims that no deal is closer to the type of brexit that people want.
Genuine question - How do we KNOW what type of brexit people want? (beyond a few small polls).

Herzlos

But Boris claimed that Brexit would be exactly like staying in, but without sending money to the EU or following their rules, and that we could halt the free movement parts we don't like. Wasn't he the first to claim that we could "have our cake and eat it"?


That's a long way from what a no deal Brexit will look like.


We haven't got a clue what kind of Brexit people want. It's hard to gauge even on here as the vocal Brexiteers keep changing their tune so that whatever the current idea of Brexit is happens to be exactly what've they've always wanted. You can see it if you can be bothered to trawl back through the forum history, it's full of "X is guaranteed, it's what we want, it's perfect" <X gets ruled out> "No-one wanted X, what makes you think we did? Prove it. I didn't say that.". <evidence> <silence>.


Maybe the EU will cave after we go WTO and give us our cake and eat it Brexit, who knows?

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

...
Maybe the EU will cave after we go WTO and give us our cake and eat it Brexit, who knows?

Only one way to find out isn't there.

If we exit through the default then they start having discussions on how to find 39 billion quid.

Then we secure our waters to stop continental fishermen. If you're going to default brexit, you need to follow it through.

Congestion at the container ports can be alleviated if we prioritize British over Irish road freight. They will be a third country to us and we don't have to provide the same transit rights.

If you want cake you've got to fight for every crumb.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

Only one way to find out isn't there.

Indeed. It's a hell of a gamble though.

If we exit through the default then they start having discussions on how to find 39 billion quid.

Well, we'd still owe them it. How they'd get us to pay up if we dig our heels in is a different matter. I suspect we'll need to hand it over in full before negotiating a future arrangement, if they have concerns about our reliability.

Then we secure our waters to stop continental fishermen. If you're going to default brexit, you need to follow it through.

Congestion at the container ports can be alleviated if we prioritize British over Irish road freight. They will be a third country to us and we don't have to provide the same transit rights.

If you want cake you've got to fight for every crumb.

Agreed. Though any dirty play we do will likely hurt us in good will. If the EU start retaliating to these games then we're stuffed.


Prioritizing British haulage is going to be an interesting one, but probably good for us and Eire in the long run as it'll give them the push needed to just bypass us. We'll lose a lot of congestion (and revenue associated with the haulage), and they'll get to avoid needed to leave and re-enter the EU.