Will Brexit happen?

Mistral001

GDJTAM wrote: »

I voted remain, I knew what I was voting for but I also knew the disruption coming out of the EU would potentially cause. Repeatedly, May said that No deal doesn't mean it's a bad deal.

The people voted and leaving we must do. We have lost faith with politicians, they all have their own views on why we should stay, why we should leave with a deal (albeit each politician knows what deal they want but not collectively) and why we should leave with a no deal. A complete shambolic mess caused by the house and the world are watching our famous respectful democratic politics be ridiculed by our own politicians.

It doesn't matter what party you support, most of them are ignoring their constituents and feathering their own personal political feathers.

We should respect the referendum, leave the EU on the 31/10/19 and begin the process of standing on our own.

We can delay Brexit in October, then throw out more deals thereafter before requesting numerous more delays!

I am also a remain voter who thinks we should leave. I think it is disgusting that MP's who have been put into Parliament by the voting public want to ignore a vote of the people in the referendum. I always thought instances of politicians in power ignoring election or referendum results only happened in other countries.

lisyloo

westernpromise wrote: »

It's not a matter of whether I think WTO is a good idea or not. It's about whether the departure process is framed to enable or to frustrate departure. It's clearly the latter, for exactly the same reasons as Sky contracts and gym memberships.

So do you think we should go back to the people and say this isn’t as easy as we thought, do you still want to leave?

If something in my personal life, let’s say emigrating turned out to be loads harder and with loads of pitfalls and fewer benefits than I had initially imagined then I would reconsider the whole proposition, wouldn’t you?

phillw

Mistral001 wrote: »

I always thought instances of politicians in power ignoring election or referendum results only happened in other countries.

It happens anywhere there are people willing to stand up and fight for what is right, rather than what is popular. That is very often not the same thing.

If they were forcing you to work in a mine or locking you up without a trial then I'd agree with you.

Can you tell me what right of yours is being violated because of our continued EU membership?

westernpromise wrote: »

It's not a matter of whether I think WTO is a good idea or not. It's about whether the departure process is framed to enable or to frustrate departure. It's clearly the latter, for exactly the same reasons as Sky contracts and gym memberships.

You'll need to expand on that because I don't understand your argument. The EU isn't stopping us leaving, the EU is stopping us from having the benefits of being in the EU without being in the EU. Like if you wanted to receive sky, without subscribing.

That seems kinda logical to me.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

No one (as far as I can tell) has claimed a Remain vote was a vote for integration.

Well, no, they wouldn't, would they? It would have lost the campaign instantly.
A Eurobarometer poll in 2015 found, however, that
Overall, the limited evidence available strongly suggests that Britons do not want further integration, but that all other Europeans, especially those in the eurozone, are more open to the idea.
https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-union-brexit-eurobarometer/

while according to this rather incautiously candid Remain MEP, EU membership ensured further integration:
My experience during 17 years in the European Parliament is of gradual, inexorable movement in one direction – European political integration – sometimes through a massive gambit such as the single currency, but more often by Monnet’s ‘small steps’. Successive British governments have sought at home to explain their agreement to such developments in the EU in practical terms while the conversation in the Parliament and more widely among the continental political elite has been over the advance of political integration.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/04/28/britians-departure-from-ever-closer-union-is-of-great-significance/

When someone who ought to know said at the time that further integration was inevitable but would be dissembled about, why should Remain claims there'll be no further integration be believed?

No, the honest policy would have been for full federalists such as Clarke and Clegg to stand up and openly advocate it. The trouble is that this would have revealed huge schisms in the Remain camp, because you'd have those of Clarke's view, those who disagreed, and those who agreed but who thought dishonesty the best policy to make it happen.

Had Remain won 52:48, there'd now be a counter-revolution going on where Remainers argued that as we'd voted to Remain we should integrate still further and join the euro and the European army. Leavers would be arguing that such a close result provided no such mandate. The main reason I still CBA to form a view on whether Remain or Leave is better is because there would have chaos no matter what.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

What makes you think it's designed to frustrate departure?

The fact that it's demonstrably impossible to arrange matters within two years, so that a movement develops arguing that exit should therefore be cancelled.

phillw

westernpromise wrote: »

The fact that it's demonstrably impossible to arrange matters within two years, so that a movement develops arguing that exit should therefore be cancelled.

I think you'll find the bill asks to extend it which it seems is what you think is required.

But two years should be enough according to the leave campaign. No matter how long you made it, the conservatives would still have run down the clock. Because they think their only strategy is a last minute threat.

That is why leaving is proving difficult, our strategy can't ever work. We need someone who is more willing to put effort in to try taking over.

You seem to want to blame the EU for our own failures. There is a word for that.

westernpromise

lisyloo wrote: »

So do you think we should go back to the people and say this isn’t as easy as we thought, do you still want to leave?

If something in my personal life, let’s say emigrating turned out to be loads harder and with loads of pitfalls and fewer benefits than I had initially imagined then I would reconsider the whole proposition, wouldn’t you?

I disagree that this is turning out harder than we thought. The government's own Remain ad said it could take 10 years. Europe's own think tank also thought it wouldn't be quick:
If “leave” wins, the transition process may take several years. It would greatly increase legal and economic uncertainty, not only in the UK but also the wider EU.
https://bruegel.org/2016/03/brexit-and-the-eu-uk-deal-consequences-for-the-eu/

The only people who thought it would be easy were buffoon Leavers such as David Davis. I have always thought him a stupid and lazy lightweight, but here's the proof.

The newly appointed minister in charge of negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union appears unaware of how EU trade deals work, it has emerged. The staunch Leave backer, a former Europe Minister, however said during the referendum campaign that Britain would negotiate individual trade deals with other EU countries....However, one of the main basic features of the European Union is that EU countries cannot negotiate individual trade deals without side countries and instead do so as a bloc of 28.

The basic fact, which was paraded by other parts of the Leave campaign during the referendum, leaves Ms Davis’s original plan for one-on-one trade deals in tatters.

“Post Brexit a UK-German deal would include free access for their cars and industrial goods, in exchange for a deal on everything else,” he said on 26 May this year.

“Similar deals would be reached with other key EU nations. France would want to protect £3 billion of food and wine exports. Italy, its £1 billion fashion exports. Poland its £3 billion manufacturing exports.”

Yes, our actual Brexit secretary thought that there would be bilateral deals to be done with individual member states.

I'd agree with the government and give it 10 years.

lisyloo

westernpromise wrote: »

I disagree that this is turning out harder than we thought.

We signed up to leave on 29/3/2019.
We have been unable to even agree the withdrawal agreement which as we all know isn’t the actual deal(s).
So how can you say it’s not harder than we thought when we can’t even get to WA stage in the timetable set plus a couple of extensions.

phillw

lisyloo wrote: »

So how can you say it’s not harder than we thought when we can’t even get to WA stage in the timetable set plus a couple of extensions.

Harder than who thought?

I'm amazed it's going so well. But then with our gas lighting PM and ERG stooges it's kinda hard to know what is real right now.

I wasn't expecting the benn-burt bill to make it through the lords without being amended. There was less opposition in the lords, which is interesting.

I just saw this headline.

"Boris Johnson says he will use 'powers of persuasion' to get Brexit deal from EU"

I'm a little confused, Boris HAS powers of persuasion? Where are they? Why isn't he using them? Instead he seems to be resorting to lies and threats. Or is that what he means?

Boris has broken the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle, not only is he incompetent at this job but he was incompetent at all his previous jobs too.

lvader

phillw wrote: »

Harder than who thought?

I'm amazed it's going so well. But then with our gas lighting PM and ERG stooges it's kinda hard to know what is real right now.

I wasn't expecting the benn-burt bill to make it through the lords without being amended. There was less opposition in the lords, which is interesting.

Lord is pro EU, I was hoping for a bit more resistance in terms of time but the votes were not in doubt.