The UK will be locked out of European Union databases once the Brexit transition period ends – but the UK is hoping a data adequacy decision will be adopted by the end of 2020. The Withdrawal Agreement (PDF), published late last night and testing printers across the nation this morning, runs to almost 600 pages and has led to …
Stop ruining Brexit for us, going round spreading your bad news and real world events like that! If it weren't for people like you, the EU would have caved months ago and given us absolutely everything we asked for and more besides! Johnny Foreigner would have fully funded the NHS for us! And paid off our national debt! Jacob Reese-Mogg wouldn't have been FORCED to buy a home in France were it not for you remoaners, spouting your truth. How dare you go round scaring everyone, warning them what's going to happen! This is what the people voted for, don't you know! Brexit means Brexit! Believe in the Bus! Backing out now would ruin democracy for ever! We fought world wars for the right to screw ourselves over!
In all seriousness, this was supposed to be a parody rant, however I think I may have underplayed it somewhat. It seems just like every other deranged Brexiteer rant I see online these days. I must go and ponder how to parody something which has turned into one big
clusterfuck parody of itself.
"We're just telling people what's going to happen."
But Mrs May did that already. "brexit means brexit".
And before that, this (from 2003):
"We can never forget that we are the servants of the people - and they are increasingly critical of the way that politicians behave.
People want an end to the sniping, the point scoring, the ranting and raving that often passes for political debate in Britain today. They want a different kind of government. A government that admits when it's got it wrong. A government that owns up to the fact that it doesn't have all the answers. A government that knows that people's lives are too important for politics to be conducted like a playground game.
We should take back the lead. We should leave the yah-boo stuff to others and instead behave in a way that gives credibility to our promises.
Politics has changed. The world has changed.
In today's Britain, we all know that the old binding ties of family or class, the old habits of deference and unquestioning loyalty, the old tribal allegiances of party politics, all these have gone.
So today's political parties win not because they only hang on to their traditional supporters, but because they understand how the people of Britain live today, and because they offer them solutions that can work in Britain tomorrow.
We have to show we understand the problems parents face just to get their children to a decent school.
We have to show we recognise what it's like to watch an elderly parent suffering in pain, because a government target says they're not a priority for treatment.
We have to show we care: about people's pensions being reduced year by year, and about the student who wants to go to university, but can't afford to pay Labour's tuition fees. Because these are the things people care about.
They're tired of politicians who parade across the world stage making high-minded promises when all they want is someone to make their lives a bit easier. "
"We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again"
Brexit... The only other question besides the Ultimate One, of Live, the Universe, and EVERYTHING! To wit the only rational response to "Brexit means Brexit". Was to ask....
Well what the bloody hell does Brexit actually mean then? Unfortunately like Deep Thought, it Seems that Teresa May is also a stealth remainer, who's willing to entertain fools as well.
it Seems that Teresa May is also a stealth remainer, who's willing to entertain fools as well.
We all know what Theresa May is, she's not a remainer and she's not really a brexiter either.
Possibly thought the best option after the tory party almost tore itself apart over the referendum.
Unfortunately, with her full steam ahead with her vision and her vision alone I get the impression what she's got her eye on is a Thatcher-like legacy with mistaken assumption that a 'ladies not for turning' type mentality will win through in the end.
Meanwhile the Brexit hardliners bray about how much a better deal they could get but it's clear their negotiating tactics will either dump us in a hard exit or they'll settle on something somewhat similar much as the DUP and Sinn Fein did in the Northern Ireland powersharing executive after they pulled down the two parties who negotiated the Good Friday agreement. A hard exit might be what they've wanted all along, to tow the UK well outside European waters for a bit of profitable Barratry.
>And, you only though to ask ~question~ NOW?!
Any large multinational should be prepared. If they aren't, that is on them. What would happen if Greece crashes out of the EU, or Italy? What if AfD becomes the party of government in Germany and decides not to fund the southern EU countries? How long do you think the EU will last then? Do these large companies really not plan for a different party gaining power? If that's the case, they deserve whatever trouble they are in.
What sort of idiot looked at European history and the EU's "ever closer union" goal and thought, "yeah, that'll work!"
Did we cheap out on the police databases and don't have our own capabilities? Well, call me a nationalist, but I'd say relying on other nations for your internal police systems is probably something you shouldn't do. The EU has been consistently sold to the public as cooperation between member states when in fact, it was creating a centralised super-state infrastructure. Now we reap the costs of that deception. I could be wrong here, perhaps the slant of the article misled me and we do have all our own stuff. In which case, how much do I care that our police are not updated about Fabio's theft of his uncle's Fiat? Cut off from EU databases? How about re-framing that statement to, "EU cut off from UK databases"? I haven't been through May's deal, but I think the approach should have been, Hard exit is a given. Now, let's sit down and discuss what each side wants.
I realise that there are real-world costs. Did you centralise on Oracle and host it in the UK? Well, I'm sorry. That will cost you to replicate it, or move it. May I commend to you some postgres?
In the end, entering into any international agreement which makes the government unable or less able to respond to a change in the long-term wishes of its populace, should not be undertaken. It is inherently anti-democratic. Of course there are costs to democracy. It would be far cheaper not to have it. I suspect it would be far cheaper if we did away with all our own systems of government and just became an administrative area of Germany, but I don't think that would be desirable for either us or the Germans.
Well that was only to be expected under May's so-called Leadership. She's obviously one of these political elites that suffers fools gladly. When she said "Brexit meant Brexit!", the very next question should have been. Well what does Brexit actually mean.
In this case it means a complete and, utter betrayal. I know how you lot like to call the French a bunch oh Cheese eating surrender monkey's. But, it's slowly looking like you lot might give 'em a run on the money for that Title.
And, I guess you lot also like a bit of Cheese yourselves, Cheddar, Wensleydale etc...
So the British are now a bunch of Cheese eating surrender monkey's QED.
And, I guess you lot also like a bit of Cheese yourselves, Cheddar, Wensleydale etc...
So the British are now a bunch of Cheese eating surrender monkey's QED.
Chedder and Wensleydale. As opposed to that stuff that comes out of squirty cans?
Who can forget that delicious moment when James May was reading out the ingredients of something that he was trying to eat and came across "Imitation American Cheese"?
and make sure that Farage and Bojo are on the other side of it. Then we can sink beneath the waves with dignity. /s
There will be a lot of hardened brexiteers who are going to feel the wrath of the public when the next election comes around in May 2019. By then it will be too late to say sorry, we didn't mean it.
£1.00 will be worth than 1 Euro by the end of the week.
As I did what Redwood and Mogg suggested to their investors, the £ hitting parity with the Euro makes me a modestly happy bunny.
Brexiters - they screwed you. Basically by saying "Do what I say, not do as I do."
But it's all right because from 2020 on we won't have access to the EUs economic data, so the Torygraph can keep telling people the Euro is about to collapse* without them knowing any better.
*It's been about to collapse since the 1990s according to them.
the Torygraph can keep telling people the Euro is about to collapse* without them knowing any better.
*It's been about to collapse since the 1990s according to them.
The collapse of the EU - usually within the next couple of months - seems to have been a regular mainstay of alt right bloggers as well.
*It's been about to collapse since the 1990s according to them.
And it will, perhaps not imminently, but a single currency can't survive without full fiscal union, and that's certainly never going to happen now, no matter how much taxpayer money is spent on bailouts.
I have to agree with you, the Euro will fall apart. It may just take longer than DT expects.
The history of currency unions is interesting, the only successful ones I have heard of is USD (and that took 90 years and a civil war to get working), the one between Belgium and Luxembourg and GBP.
Greece was thrown out of the Latin Currency union because they put too little noble metal in the coins, and the Scandinavian one fell apart with WWI
Before Schengen i used to drive across Europe a lot. At the German border a huge customs post checking stamping stopping. On the Belgian side, a bored official waving yiou through.....
A border is s hard as its participants care to make it.
It is not so hard for pre-booked documents to be tide to number plates with NPR on teh major roads to automatically let all pre cleared traffic through, with a post up the road to examine those that have not so been cleared and simply let cars through regardless.
the only person one would refuse entry to would be Bob coke sniffer has-been Geldof.
Before Schengen i used to drive across Europe a lot. At the German border a huge customs post checking stamping stopping. On the Belgian side, a bored official waving yiou through.....
I had the same experience and it was a case of getting the passports out, waving them at the guard as one went through at around 10mph.
The only drag was taking the train from Belgium through to Germany as the thing would stop at Trier and then the officials would pop onto the train, do the check and then the train would carry on. This often meant a pause in the journey of around 45 minutes. But often, as with continental rail travel (assuming one wasn't on a Russian train) it was a comfortable experience and this just went along with the glorious haze of relaxation so it wasn't a problem.
>Before Schengen i used to drive across Europe a lot. At the German border a huge customs post checking stamping stopping. On the Belgian side, a bored official waving yiou through.....
But that was before Security Theatre kicked in. It'll be more than their jobs worth to wave anyone through - especially a truck that could contain immigrants, explosive or....oranges.
"A right pain if you get given some on a trip to Scotland - and then have them refused in a shop in England."
How far south do you have to be before that starts to become an issue? I'n in NE England and regularly travel to Scotland and often come back with a few Scottish bank notes and have never had an issue spending them in local shops.
"How far south do you have to be before that starts to become an issue? "
I used to visit our Scottish office quite regularly. North Hertfordshire small shops have declined them. On one occasion a woman was trying to buy a toy in a charity shop for her kids just before Saturday closing. She only had Scottish notes after just arriving on a weekend visit to relatives. She was sent round the corner to the bank cash machine - which was out of cash. I exchanged an English note for it - and my bank accepted it ok.
IIRC Some Scottish banks print their own bank notes - but they are not regarded as legal tender in England. A right pain if you get given some on a trip to Scotland - and then have them refused in a shop in England.
So do the N.I. banks. You get a few shops that'll recognise a Scottish note, try to hand over an Ulster Bank or Northern Bank note, you'll be lucky if the shop owner doesn't try to detain you while trying to dial the cops.
try to hand over an Ulster Bank or Northern Bank note, you'll be lucky if the shop owner doesn't try to detain you while trying to dial the cops.
It's less of a problem now that RoI uses Euros. It was more confusing when they still had Irish pounds, I even had a bank in Bristol question what exchange rate they should offer on an Ulster bank 20 pound note!
Scottish Notes aren't legal tender, even in Scotland. Neither are NI notes. They're promissory notes and the banks hold the same value of Bank of England notes to meet those promises. The BoE prints million and hundred million pound notes to let them do that. English banks did print notes but a change in the law stopped new banks from doing it and the old ones merged or went out of business.
"and the Scandinavian one fell apart with WWI".
I wonder where you got that from, it's rubbish. There was a time when Sweden/Finland, Denmark, and Norway plus other regions around the Baltic was ruled by one queen*, but that is a long time ago and the "monetary" systems then have nothing to do with today.
* a very interesting person, buried in the Vatican, if memory serves me (without the Wiki)
Sure, but like then and now there was a different currency in each country. NKR, DKR, SKR. I think there was a similar system between the Rand and the Dollar, and there is now "The Rand is legal tender in the Common Monetary Area between South Africa, Swaziland, Lesotho, and Namibia, although the last three countries do have their own currencies pegged at par with rand."
This has nothing to do with a single currency shared by 19 countries.
The Eu and indeed the Western econoy has been kicking te debt can down the road for around 16 years now.
It is impossible to maintain without more and more people to spread today's debts over tomorrows population.
A falling population is unthinkable.So we need immigrants.
You dint actually think it was about social justice did you?
@ Voyna i Mor
"*It's been about to collapse since the 1990s according to them."
It did. To peoples amazement the EU sacrificed countries instead of dealing with the Euro problem, that is why they are still behind recovery and not considered to be in an enviable position.
It has taken a while but the EU did seem to catch up and realise that the Euro's critics and the creator of the Euro were right and that the currency is unstable. But then the EU has finally caught up to the realisation that the EU is fragile.
>And the NHS will get an extra £350 million a week, remember.
With the £'s exchange rate and with that its purchasing power falling like it is currently does this could actually come to pass (if the NHS is to be funded at the current level in inflation adjusted terms, that is).
>Amusingly it sounds like May is actually considering doing it now. I guess that might buy the hospitals a new box of pens.
However, given how the medical professions have become adapt at blowing budgets, you can guarantee the extra £350m per week, won't prevent NHS trusts running out of money around Christmas...
So did your Great, Great (and now possibly, Great), Grandfather sacrifice his life for this? How about your Great, Grandfather some Twenty-ich Years latter?
But, here you lot are cheating for what is by all rights the incidus birth of the Germanic Fourth Reich. Compleat with its own SS (cough) EU Army (cough). Yeah may sold you lot up the Thames for 30 pieces of Ag? I think you lot sold yourselves out long ago.
But, the MSM have so misused the Term Nazi, referring to President Trump. That they have since lost all sight as to who the real NAZIs are (usually to be found in Bruxelles), but also to be found in such Cosmopolitan Cities such as, Paris, and of course what good Nazi story doesn't include Berlin?
Trump supports white supremacists and describes them as "good people". Please provide evidence of the same in the countries you listed.
Also, my grandad survived WW2 after being a tank commander. He backed the EU, as did Winston Churchill, they guy that helped came up with the idea and the European Court of Justice.
The question becomes: who should i listen to? A war hero and the greatest brit that ever lived or some numpty on a forum shouting "Trump's a nice guy!"?
It was the British army taking pot shots at my grandfather around a century ago, and the Black and Tans, ordered in by the famous English hero, Churchill. I've worked in Germany and I found the people friendly and welcoming to foreigners. I've also worked in England.
"So did your Great, Great (and now possibly, Great), Grandfather sacrifice his life for this? How about your Great, Grandfather some Twenty-ich Years latter?"
The first one was for the willy waving of our political masters. (I learnt about "The great lie" at school, did you?)
We were so desperate to avoid a second as a result we sent Chamberlain the appeaser for "peace in our time". When that didn't work we (eventually, and with the help of the French, the Poles, the Americans and Canadians and many others) did what was necessary.
Afterwards Churchill spoke of a United States of Europe, he is even named as one off founding forces of the EU.
My Great (Whatever) sacrificed themselves because they were ordered to. At least the second time round the man ordering them to their deaths had a sense of the future. I'm not blind to his faults (1M dead in India), but I will quote him directly:
"We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple.All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong, and gain as their reward, blessing instead of cursing."
Which makes it fun to listen to xenophobes give speeches selectively invoking Churchill.
I think the most honest statement I saw from an elderly Brexit supporter was (I paraphrase), "I don't care if it fucks up the country I want the UK to leave Europe".
The only think I predict now is utter fucking chaos as the SNP now wades in. The only reason the SNP lost the indy vote was based on the prospect of an indy scotland being thrown out the EU and having to rejoin. What we got by staying was a ticket out of the EU vote through mostly by the nearly dead.
If the SNP run another indy vote they'll win on the ticket of Scotland being able to rejoin the EU.
Politicians, a plague on all your houses.
If the SNP run another indy vote they'll win on the ticket of Scotland being able to rejoin the EU.
You think? Sturgeon's already having a hard time trying to explain why Scotland breaking away from the greater UK is good, yet being a smaller part of of an even larger and more controlling polity is desirable. It all comes down to who they'll get most money from, but she probably doesn't want to admit that.
Then imagine the border issues that will throw up, especially since that border hasn't been real for centuries. They'll spent 50 years arguing about where it should be drawn.
Then imagine the border issues that will throw up, especially since that border hasn't been real for centuries.
I'll simplify things. The Antonine Wall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Wall sounds like a good starting point.
[exists, pursued by a large hairy individual wearing a skirt and carrying a claidheamh-mòr. http://reelgirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/King-Fergus-Brave.jpg]
It seems that an alternative to Brexit would have been England and Wales leaving the UK while Scotland and NI would have remained thereby remaining in the EU as well (I seem to recall this was what the voters in the respective parts wanted). Actually, I think there would have been precedent for an even better trick: if memory serves Greenland left the EU while remaining a part of Denmark.
Scotland and NI would have remained thereby remaining in the EU as well (I seem to recall this was what the voters in the respective parts wanted).
Except that the EU made it very clear that it wasn't going to be allowed. The UK is the EU member, if Scotland and/or NI were to secede from the UK they could apply to join the EU as independent nations. It would not matter if the UK were still an EU member at the time of secession or not, there would be no automatic 'pass' to membership. They would be required to accept the Euro (after demonstrating that their independent economies were up to it), join Schengen, abandon all opt-outs & rebates. It's a complete non-starter.
"if memory serves Greenland left the EU while remaining a part of Denmark.".
To make any sense of that one sentence a few more are needed.
"Greenland, the world's largest island, is about 79% ice-capped. Vikings reached the island in the 10th century from Iceland; Danish colonization began in the 18th century, and Greenland became an integral part of the Danish Realm in 1953. It joined the European Community (now the EU) with Denmark in 1973 but withdrew in 1985 over a dispute centered on stringent fishing quotas. Greenland remains a member of the Overseas Countries and Territories Association of the EU. Greenland was granted self-government in 1979 by the Danish parliament; the law went into effect the following year. Greenland voted in favor of increased self-rule in November 2008 and acquired greater responsibility for internal affairs when the Act on Greenland Self-Government was signed into law in June 2009. Denmark, however, continues to exercise control over several policy areas on behalf of Greenland, including foreign affairs, security, and financial policy in consultation with Greenland's Self-Rule Government".
PS. 91% of export is fish.
There was a brilliant quote from someone in Europe, forgot who.
Divorce means divorce. You split the belongings the children suffer, but everyone at some point gets on with it. What the British want is not a divorce, they want to be allowed to still sleep in the house, use the car and even f*ck their ex-spouse on Tuesdays and Thursdays regardless of do they want it or not.
No, that's what te EU want.
And May is their tool.
What the British want is a 'clean break'.
Unfortunately no brexiteer has been allowed near the leave process.
the resultant muddle is now being both blamed on leavers who had no input, and being used to move the country towards remaining.
The odd thing is that remoaners seem oblivious to how cynically they are being manipulated.
Maybe their citizens are as stupid and dumb as the EIU considers them.
What the British want is a 'clean break'.
A very small majority voted leave. There are 16 million of us who voted to stay.
I am so SICK of being told that "hard Brexit, get out no matter what damage it does" (aka "a clean break") is what the British people want. It is not what I want, nor anyone I know.
It's not what the British want. It's what a few tabloids and politicians want. Most of us are just sick of the whole fucking mess we're in now, and want it sorted out - and very many of us, probably by now a majority, would prefer it to be sorted out by saying sod it - let's just stay - it's much easier.
"majority voted leave"
Just keep repeating that. And think about democracy as you do.
OK, I'll try that.
"majority voted leave"
"majority voted leave"
"majority voted leave"
"majority voted leave"
"majority voted leave"
Nope. I still see an advisory referendum with a tiny majority one way, that suddenly became a binding referendum, taking near as damn it half the country to a place they didn't want to go. Every other country which has binding referendums insists on a supermajority to ensure that there is no real argument.
I still see a referendum where the people were lied to by politicians and tabloids with their own agenda, which was financed by illegal payments, and where, two years later, it is clear that what was promised (basically, leaving the EU but keeping all the advantages) is not possible.
I still see a referendum called by Cameron to appease the Euroskeptics in his own party, just to keep them quiet. No-one really believed that we were actually going to vote leave. The politicians in power just went through the motions, and only afterwards realized they'd put the country into a complete mess.
I see a country which is more divided than I have even known in my whole life. A mess caused by politicians who were thinking of their party, not of their country, and by tabloid owners thinking of their bank balances, not their readers.
I don't see democracy anywhere. I just see manipulation by the tabloids, politicians, and the super-rich.
"OK, I'll try that."
Oh no you were doing so well I was proud of you until I expanded that comment. I thought- if he keeps it up he will realise. But then you started trying to justify minority rule and somehow confusing 'tiny majority' with somehow not a majority and then something about supermajority (aka you lost and dont like it) etc.
And yes politicians lied. Both sides and badly. And as a leaver watching a remain PM try to keep us in I agree with "I don't see democracy anywhere. I just see manipulation by the tabloids, politicians". The continuation of pro-EU propaganda that has been so badly discredited over and over is sickening.
But before you get to any of that we should take small steps and start at the beginning. Now repeat- "majority voted leave". Keep going you will get there.
So, in codejunky's world, the half who voted for the status quo, and all the rest who didn't express an view for whatever reason (including not being allowed) magically vanish. A tiny majority is exactly the same as a massive majority in codejunky's mind.
Please don't ever go into politics - there are far too many like you there already. People who don't know what 'public service' means, who think 'my way or the highway' is the only way, and who would happily nuke the enemy because 'they deserve it'.
No, codejunky, we really don't need more people with those kinds of attitudes towards other human beings, and how we all live together. We have far too many of them already - and look at the state we're in!
"So, in codejunky's world, the half who voted for the status quo, and all the rest who didn't express an view for whatever reason (including not being allowed) magically vanish"
Ahhh I see your problem. Its called the real world and you are wrong. For example it was not half voting for the status quo (50%) is was less than half. Also those who didnt express a view do magically vanish from the calculation since they didnt vote, so we cannot assume their opinion (or that they have one).
"A tiny majority is exactly the same as a massive majority in codejunky's mind"
Actually it seems to be you struggling with the words. You can remove the tiny and massive words because this is a democracy and the rules of the vote were in place before the vote and the vote returned a valid result which met the rules and as a result the majority is the democratic opinion.
"Please don't ever go into politics"
I have no intention of going into that cesspit. But considering your difficulty with the basics of democracy I suggest you also avoid politics.
"People who don't know what 'public service' means, who think 'my way or the highway' is the only way"
It amazes me that you can write that without applying the same logic to yourself. You already pointed out the majority vote, which is also the result of the referendum. A referendum we got due to a general election and supported to go forward by another general election. And yet you want to push your minority opinion as the only way?
"Codejumky, your reply metely reinforces my argument."
It should. Your argument standing on reality then claiming the opposite. The only part I dindt join you in was the opposite. You wrote about voting but didnt agree with how votes are counted. You wrote about the majority but didnt seem to follow how it applied to a vote. Told me to avoid going into politics which I agreed and returned the suggestion. And I agreed with your last statement only that you seemed to apply it to me but forgot about yourself.
If you think you have any valid points feel free to express them. Or keep them to yourself and assume they are valid if it makes you feel happier in yourself. But if your gonna write on a public board you are going to have to expect a reply that may not meet your expectations of agreement.
Codejunky, I don't think you understand what I said at all, or you choose not to.
It's not about 'majorities', it's about how people live and work together when they disagree. A very small majority merely emphasises the need for consensus.
The referendum and 'Brexit' are a classic example of how NOT to do democracy and how NOT to implement a fundamental change.
"Codejunky, I don't think you understand what I said at all, or you choose not to."
Your reply contained nothing of substance only that I re-enforced your views to you. I wasnt trying to misunderstand, I am all for discussion.
"It's not about 'majorities', it's about how people live and work together when they disagree. A very small majority merely emphasises the need for consensus."
And there is none. No consensus. We were dragged into the EU, the majority has been against the EU for a fair time (long enough for multiple promises of choice without delivering), and a desperate campaign to force a lack of democracy. A democratic option was made available in which people made their choice and the result was derived. That is how such disagreements are resolved. Unfortunately the losing side is determined to inflict their minority view on the rest of us. This wouldnt even be a discussion if remain won.
"The referendum and 'Brexit' are a classic example of how NOT to do democracy and how NOT to implement a fundamental change."
Ok. Then you can be proud to know that 2 elections as well as the referendum delivered the result. If you feel it is too complex for the people to vote on then you can be proud to be ignored by the gov as they conduct brexit. If you feel the country should be trapped in the EU without a referendum nor choice then maybe you should move to France. According to their president they would probably vote out, but he wont give them that choice.
You're right, there is no consensus, because of the incompetent and self-serving way the whole thing has been handled.
If the UK were a business the CEO, and the whole Board, would long ago have been sacked for their complete mishandling of the situation.
We are, in fact, reaping the consequences of years of political cowardice, inaction and complacency; not over the EU, but over the management of this country. The EU is largely a very convenient scapegoat and distraction that politicians and other stirrers have used quite shamelessly to excuse and justify their deeds, or lack of them.
And now, in a crass and bungled attempt to deal with the internal politics of his own party Cameron leads us into the present clown-show. You really couldn't write the script, no one would believe it - although for everyone on the sidelines it makes great entertainment.
In or out of the EU, the 'EU', for all it's faults, is not our major problem - we are, as a nation and as a political entity. And 'Brexit' has exposed the truth - we are a joke, a whining bunch who refuse to take responsibility for the mess we are making, who look everywhere but ourselves to cast the blame.
Inside or outside the EU the only people who are going to fix 'Britain' are us, but as it stands if 'Brexit' is an example of our present quality as a nation then it doesn't bode well.
"You're right, there is no consensus, because of the incompetent and self-serving way the whole thing has been handled."
So how should it have been handled? How do we ask the people if we should be in the EU? This is a problem the EU is noticing as a lot of the other members are having the same problem with people not liking the EU.
"The EU is largely a very convenient scapegoat and distraction that politicians and other stirrers have used quite shamelessly to excuse and justify their deeds, or lack of them."
That is a dead on statement. But also we gold plate EU law into UK law. Remove the EU and both of those go away.
"And now, in a crass and bungled attempt to deal with the internal politics of his own party Cameron leads us into the present clown-show."
True. Only one party had brexit planned and that was UKIP. This would be done, dusted and in a bow by now.
"Inside or outside the EU the only people who are going to fix 'Britain' are us"
Ok, I am fine with that. So we can be happy to be out because we need to fix our gov and can focus on that anyway. But for us leave voters we dont have the bad governance of the EU above our bad government.
But what we do have is being a relatively small country now outside our immediate neighbour's 'club', and also the largest trading bloc on the planet. We will be giving up our influence and benefits for a 'mess of pottage' indeed.
No doubt we will find our way, but the world is not the world where Britain once called the shots, looting and slaughtering it's way to wealth and influence. Instead we will join all the other middling nations who have to take what they can get from the big players, and from each other. Nothing wrong with that at all, except it is probably not quite what many 'Leavers' and 'Brexiteers' have in mind.
And there will be an immediate and painful cost to the nation, which as usual will be borne by those least able to cope. So much for 'social justice' and the 'well being' of the nation. Mind you, no doubt the poor deserve their poverty, they clearly lack what it takes to succeed in the 'survival of the fittest', 'dog eat dog' world of those who are so keen to have a 'clean break', whatever the cost.
"But what we do have is being a relatively small country now outside our immediate neighbour's 'club'"
Which has the total and absolute relevance of saying supercalifragilisticexpialidotious. Aka a completely worthless statement.
"and also the largest trading bloc on the planet."
Again so? Most countries are outside of it too.
"but the world is not the world where Britain once called the shots, looting and slaughtering it's way to wealth and influence"
Ahhh the self hating view of history. Do you not think most of Europe has plenty to hate about themselves too? That doesnt mean we can make it right by selling out the country and punishing ourselves now.
"Instead we will join all the other middling nations who have to take what they can get from the big players"
Big players like China and the US? The EU doesnt even compare. We are part of the developed world, unlikely to end up in such a severely damaged state as Greece and some other members of the EU (unless we elect Corbyn ofc) and throughout the leave process the EU keeps fearing we get a competitive advantage aka not trapped in the EU rules and regs.
"And there will be an immediate and painful cost to the nation, which as usual will be borne by those least able to cope. So much for 'social justice' and the 'well being' of the nation."
Oh so now we should ditch democracy for the good of the people! I didnt see that coming but no. But with full employment and wages rising (shockingly due to less migration) that is another poor argument. And yes there could be a shock but we only need to look at the state of the EU proper (Eurozone) to see how bad things could be and prolonged.
"Mind you, no doubt the poor deserve their poverty, they clearly lack what it takes to succeed in the 'survival of the fittest', 'dog eat dog' world of those who are so keen to have a 'clean break', whatever the cost."
And now tar any view opposite as heartless and your position need no fact or realistic position. A clean break already shown to reduce food prices which is an effective wage rise for EVERYONE including the poor. So in the same spirit- you obviously think the poor should starve and the EU drag us all down in their multiple self inflicted crises.
And as for handling the 'referendum', as has already been said many times, any fundamental change is normally and sensibly handled by: a. offering an 'advisory' referendum (which this one technically was except the politicians decided to overlook that constitutional legality), with a view to using the result as a means of assessing how to proceed, and b. when any decisive vote us taken (whether in the referendum or later) that a 'super-majority' is required to avoid the divisive mess we are now in with the country split down the middle and riven by entrenched positions.
This is all basic stuff to the managers and organisers of countless groups and companies, but apoarently beyond the wit and/or beneath the status of our political class, who presume to serve us, but seem mostly interested in serving their own interests.
"any fundamental change is normally and sensibly handled by: a. offering an 'advisory' referendum (which this one technically was except the politicians decided to overlook that constitutional legality), with a view to using the result as a means of assessing how to proceed,"
Ok, so joining the EU was invalid due to the fundamental change not involving a referendum. Instead the referendum was for a common market trading block.
"b. when any decisive vote us taken (whether in the referendum or later) that a 'super-majority' is required to avoid the divisive mess we are now in with the country split down the middle and riven by entrenched positions."
Ok. So we had a general election to get a referendum, a democratic vote (majority win) referendum and then another general election where the only main party for remain got almost wiped out. Done. So why are the remainers still so entrenched? What is wrong with them?
"but seem mostly interested in serving their own interests."
Like the idea of a peoples vote where remainers want to stop us from leaving? Leave has won 3 votes so far!
If it's any consolation I don't particularly care whether we leave or remain. What I do care about is how and why we make such a decision. The how and why of Brexit has been abjectly poor, the evidence for that is all around us - including our discussion.
Brexit is most likely to prove a very poor choice - there is no evidence to suggest otherwise cand plenty to support that assertion. At no stage has anyone supporting 'Brexit' presented a cogent and substantiated argument as to why leaving in the manner that we are is going to result in a situation that is equal to or better than remaining and having a seat at the table.
Added to which the chief proponents of Brexit don't seem to care that they have no useful plan. Presumably they hope that at best they will become the new leaders of the new regime and reap their rewards, and at worst they will be free to plunder the wreckage. Either way there is no evidence whatsoever that any of them give a shit about the wellbeing of the nation and its many inhabitants - especially the most vulnerable to economic and social crisis.
"If it's any consolation I don't particularly care whether we leave or remain"
Ok thats good. I actually do care and after the long road to actually get a democratic choice for the first time on this project and I did vote leave and that was the result. 1 election to get the vote, 1 referendum where the result was returned and 1 election confirming to carry on.
"The how and why of Brexit has been abjectly poor, the evidence for that is all around us - including our discussion."
I agree. Both campaigns lied their arses off and I originally thought the official leave campaign was there to make remain look legitimate, until I saw the quality of both campaigns and felt embarrassed these people are our politicians.
"Brexit is most likely to prove a very poor choice - there is no evidence to suggest otherwise cand plenty to support that assertion."
Well thats bollocks. We can see the state the EU is in. After 20+ years of being trapped in it we voted out. It is in multiple self inflicted crises and looking further inward while trying to figure some way to implement 'ever closer union' without more members leaving. It is highly unpopular throughout the EU and that is before we debate if we like 'it'. There are plenty benefits in leaving which is why the EU keep asking us to sign away our competitive advantage.
"At no stage has anyone supporting 'Brexit' presented a cogent and substantiated argument as to why leaving in the manner that we are is going to result in a situation that is equal to or better than remaining and having a seat at the table."
Then I suggest going through my post history and read the many times I have done so as well as the various offers of various topics where the UK will be better off. Very few remain positions seem to hold much merit only fear.
"Added to which the chief proponents of Brexit don't seem to care that they have no useful plan."
To a point I agree. The only party with a plan to leave was Farages UKIP. May seems so desperate to remain while that not being a legitimate option that neither leave nor remain seem happy. I have no faith in her.
"Presumably they hope that at best they will become the new leaders of the new regime and reap their rewards, and at worst they will be free to plunder the wreckage. Either way there is no evidence whatsoever that any of them give a shit about the wellbeing of the nation and its many inhabitants - especially the most vulnerable to economic and social crisis."
Sounds about right. The only consolation being we can vote them out and replace them. But I am under no illusion that the EU cares about us at all. They dont have to fear us voting them out and our jellyfish in power dont want to leave.
Your reasons for wanting to leave, well founded or not, do not constitute a plan - they are effectively wishful thinking so far as the actualitie of our situation is concerned.
Nothing in this life is 'perfect', and that certainly applies to the EU. The point of belonging to the EU is a very old one - simply symbolised by a bundle of sticks bound together contrasted with a single stick. Who knows whether the 'EU' has a future - that is up to its members.
As for 'Britain' going it alone, well it will have some kind of future. On the strength of present performance not a particularly healthy one: there is no clear vision for the nation as a whole that everyone can cleave to with some integrity and hope, and what vision there is is largely that of self-serving charlatans out to enrich and aggrandise themselves, with little to no regard for the well being of those most effected by their vainglory and greed.
Britain going it alone is certainly an option, and could be a decent if hard option given the reality of world politics and economics. It is very unfortunate that 'Brexit' has been chosen as teh way of doing it, because 'Brexit means Brexit' and we all know that that means that 'Brexit' either means whatever the speaker wants it to mean, or it means nothing at all - which is summed up well in the present state of things. Truly it is a Humpty-Dumpty departure and Humpty has already fallen off the wall, and no one has any plausible plan for putting Humpty back together again.
"they are effectively wishful thinking so far as the actualitie of our situation is concerned."
Just as the fantasies of what remain would be. The idea that leave is somehow so bad is why such arguments cant be taken seriously.
"The point of belonging to the EU is a very old one - simply symbolised by a bundle of sticks bound together contrasted with a single stick"
The EU is based on an old way of thinking with protectionist blocks. Remainers at one point were accusing us of wanting to go back to the days of an empire etc, while fighting for an outdated construct.
"On the strength of present performance not a particularly healthy one"
One where the gov is determined to remain. I agree, which is why I voted leave and want us to leave the EU.
"there is no clear vision for the nation as a whole that everyone can cleave to with some integrity and hope"
Same inside the EU. Less than half wanted to remain, over half wanted to leave. The country was sold to the EU without the nation but somehow that now matters when the vote didnt give the 'right' result. As for integrity and hope, yet again not attributes of the EU. A place increasingly unpopular with the populations of the member countries.
I too dislike the lack of a plan. We voted leave in a referendum where the gov rigged the vote, threatened the population, produced so much FUD and actively refused to prepare for the possibility of voting leave. Then handing the job to a remainer who is trying to keep us in when all sensible negotiation has been telling the EU to shove their attempts to own the UK. The guaranteed outcome we can do unilaterally is leave. That is our starting point and only if the EU is serious about some mutually beneficial deal should we bother to entertain negotiation.
Codejunky, your paranoia is showing. One common theme of many who favour 'Brexit' is their determination that everything they are unhappy about -- EU, the state of the nation, the fiasco of 'Brexit' -- that it is all someone else's fault.
In reality the EU is a joint effort of nation states (it is not a monolithic construct); the state of the 'British' nation is the responsibility of all of it's inhabitants (the EU is a sideshow); and 'Brexit' is simply a turd that no amount of polishing is going to improve. 'Brexit' is a stinking excretion by a nation that is being poorly led, and is hamstrung by it's own internal contradictions, aggravated by ignorance, racism, and generations of entrenched social injustice driven by greed and entitlement.
Leaving the 'EU' or staying in is, in the end, almost an irrelevance to the realities of Britain's besetting problems. It's rather like people who emigrate and then wonder why they are still miserable, perhaps are even more miserable, because they lack the insight to understand that they have merely taken all their baggage - the things that really are making them miserable - with them to their new home. They have completely failed to address the actual causes of their distress, i.e. not their location, but themselves.
"Codejunky, your paranoia is showing. One common theme of many who favour 'Brexit' is their determination that everything they are unhappy about -- EU, the state of the nation, the fiasco of 'Brexit' -- that it is all someone else's fault."
You might wish to elaborate. In what way is any of what I have said paranoia? Stating the facts is not paranoia. And for someone who apparently doesnt care either way remain or leave you really do seem to have a problem with the idea of brexit. So far you tell me its bad but dont seem to have a reason only how bad our gov is (which is not a reason).
"the state of the 'British' nation is the responsibility of all of it's inhabitants (the EU is a sideshow)"
And since you dont care if we remain or leave there shouldnt be an issue for you that we are leaving.
"'Brexit' is a stinking excretion by a nation that is being poorly led"
I dont disagree. As in the comment you are responding to explains clearly.
"They have completely failed to address the actual causes of their distress, i.e. not their location, but themselves."
Ok thats fine, so we leave the EU and your fine with that. So all your polishing turd comments dont matter in the context of brexit, you are fine with that. And we agree the gov isnt great. So what is the problem apart from an excuse to bash leaving the EU?
Because it is all so pointless, and beside the point. The 'EU', whatever it's faults, is not our problem. Our problems are internal, but joy of joys we have this thing called the 'EU' which makes the most wonderful scapegoat, right on our doorstep. Everything is the 'EU's fault! If only we left everything would be fine.
It's absolute rubbish.
You're right, I really don't mind if 'Britain' leaves the 'EU'; in a considered, planned manner, with a clear understanding of why, what the costs will be, and what the benefits will be, and in a way that engages the support of a decent majority of the population (something at least approaching a consensus), so that the nay sayers have to acknowledge that the nation as a whole generally supports the move.
But 'Brexit' is none of the above. I'm not against 'leaving'; I think that as things stand we are probably better off remaining in, and getting our own house in order; and I am against 'Brexit', which on all the evidence to date is doing nothing but harm to this country.
"which makes the most wonderful scapegoat, right on our doorstep."
So you should be cheering brexit. We leave and therefore wont have the scapegoat to blame, we will need to sort our own government out and we all all happy.
"and in a way that engages the support of a decent majority of the population (something at least approaching a consensus)"
Something we never had for joining but had 3 votes out of 3 to have a choice and leave. There is absolutely no consensus to remain by a long shot.
"so that the nay sayers have to acknowledge that the nation as a whole generally supports the move."
That is called democracy, I agree they need to acknowledge the 3 votes (2 GE 1 referendum), they dont.
"I think that as things stand we are probably better off remaining in, and getting our own house in order"
Which wont happen as you say there is a scapegoat. One that inflicts its own damage.
"which on all the evidence to date is doing nothing but harm to this country."
That would be the FUD I assume? The evidence is actually pretty good for voting leave so far. The argument that brexit was causing harm lost its legs pretty quickly. Now its will cause harm in the future. Just as the 2 recessions predicted for brexit didnt happen and now its some point in the future (aka blame the next business cycle recession on brexit).
Obviously the EU will remain a scapegoat, in or out, as long as UK politicians and members of yhe public refuse to take responsibility for the internal problems we face.
As it happens the vote to become members of the EEC, etc. was nothing like the farce of the Brexit referendum. In fact in comparison it wad a model of probity and gave a more usable outcome.
But the EU is not the issue, as far as I am concerned. The issue is our failure ad a nation to govern ourselves properly, such that we end up having to deal with a failure of good governance called 'Brexit'.
@Codejunky re: "The only party with a plan to leave was Farages UKIP."
I suggest you reread that 'plan'; in light of what we now know. I think you will find that with leaving the EU the devil is in the detail - something that is missing from ALL Brexit plans, including UKIPs...
@ Silver badge
"I suggest you reread that 'plan'; in light of what we now know."
It is still the only one with a plan. It was to leave, brexit, be out of the EU. It didnt have the uncertainty attached as we have now with a gov trying to remain in all but name. The country would be leaving and looking out to the world and the EU's worst fears of the UK using its competitive advantage would be reality.
Of course we can only look hypothetically at how it would have gone but it seems to have avoided all of the problems we face currently.
I grant you that UKIP were and still are the only group to publish a plan, which whilst I'm not so sure it would have avoided all the problems we currently face, it was, at least, definite about where the UK would be on 30-Mar-2019.
>a gov trying to remain in all but name.
Funnily I don't see that, May seems committed to achieving Brexit, but without the total break in trade relations that is part and parcel of the UKIP plan; remember everything in the UKIP plan about the WTO can be regarded as being rubbish as it is based on a flawed understanding of how the WTO operates.
What is going to be interesting in the coming weeks, is given the events of yesterday, where Mogg, Davies and other prominent Brexiteers publicly demonstrated the extent of both their delusions and support (and more importantly being ridiculed in the Brexit leaning media), is whether May has the strength (or can be forced) to toss Brexit altogether... :¬
It looks as if this really will run to the last minute, however, might be advisable to save some popcorn for the encores...
"at least, definite about where the UK would be on 30-Mar-2019."
This does seem to be the biggest sticking point with our currency which swings with gov revelations and EU releases.
"remember everything in the UKIP plan about the WTO can be regarded as being rubbish as it is based on a flawed understanding of how the WTO operates."
In what way? I know Clegg got it wrong and a few others claiming we had to charge maximum WTO tariffs or something. We are already a member in our own right too.
"It looks as if this really will run to the last minute, however, might be advisable to save some popcorn for the encores..."
Tbh this was expected. Apparently the EU have form for last minute but I dont credit our gov with much better (as above the current uncertainty). I must admit to slightly harbouring the hope that May would be kicked out and a hard brexitter taking charge. But since we are practically at the end of the negotiation period this is a bit late for a hail mary.
I must admit to slightly harbouring the hope that May would be kicked out and a hard brexitter taking charge.
Yes it is a shame we haven't had the benefit of seeing the hard Brexiteers actually having to walk-their-talk, although I anticipate they will somehow find a way blame the EU on why they are incapable of reaching an agreement between themselves over which Brexit they actually want; I mean it is so unreasonable for the EU to expect them to actually know and articulate just what exactly it is that they want and how it can be realised in the real world.
I think yesterday's Mogg event was the first time the media started to appreciate just how deluded the leading hard Brexiteers are... Remember Mogg wants a hard Brexit, yet is too scared to publish his plan because he knows it contains more holes than a sieve, he is also too scared to put himself forward as a candidate to replace T.May...
Most of us are just sick of the whole fucking mess we're in now, and want it sorted out
And it's treally sad that Brexit is being seen as the only way to do that. If the self-serving politicians in Brussels could actually see past the end of their own ambitions, and stopped assuming that the only solution for Europe was centralized control with them in charge, we'd never have needed Brexit.
I can't help but feel that the next EU elections are going to be quite a wake-up call.
"What the British want is a 'clean break'"
Thanks to David Cameron's two box vote we actually don't know that at all.
We do know that the vote was so close that it was within the sampling error of most opinion polls, and we do know that sentiment has shifted somewhat since, but not by a definitive amount.
I suspect that sentiment will continue to shift as the consequences of leaving the EU become clearer over the next few months.
Coat: off out now
">Unfortunately no brexiteer has been allowed near the leave process.
Except for Boris Johnson & David Davis & Dominic Raab - Brexiteers all."
Except they weren't. Boris was FS. David Davis was involved in negotiations but that wasn't the leave process at all. The leave process was being conducted by Oily Robins in secret and the results of that were handed to the cabinet at Chequers where they were told to agree to the dog's breakfast or walk home. As for Raab he ended up being Oily Robins dispatch clerk shuttling back and forth to Brussels with Oily's latest sellout. Raab finally resigned when he realised that what had been agreed about the backstop was not actually in the printed draft that wasn't available until yesterday. After the cabinet had been in to see May one by one and told they had to support it before they could read the nearly 600 pages.
>Unfortunately no brexiteer has been allowed near the leave process.
Ummm You mean like David Davis?
Who threw a tantrum and quit when the EU decided they didn't want the tail wagging the dog?
Or Dominic Raab?
Resigned over a deal *HE* helped put together?
The problem is that while we do indeed sell more as a % of our trade, its note the same % of *THEIRS* and besides, with the EU Deal with Japan, the EU now has a zero tariff deal with an economy WAAAYYY bigger than ours. The Brexiteers vastly overestimate our importance.
As for the "rest of the world" we already have trade deals with 60 other countries... because the EU has those deals. The UK will no longer have them after brexit.
Actually given the current "Brexit means Remain" agreement that May wants us to sign up to, it's more like we hand over the keys but want to keep sleeping in the hallway.
This was inevitable, unless we want to fuck the economy into the toilet. Some of you may not care that the NHS gets underfunded and understaffed yet further, or schools once more lose the capacity to provide non-leaking roofs, but you know damn well that you are in the minority.
It would of course be easier simply not to leave the EU. Anyone who wants to rant about 'faceless bureaucrats' or 'unelected MEPs' or 'shiftless immigrants' in response is now welcome to do so. If you haven't learned anything about such basic aspects of reality by now, you never will. And the rest of us will laugh at you.
Someone remind me about how many thousands of more civil servants the government has said it will need to employ due to Brexit. This article says 11,000 and counting.
IIRC even the current size of the UK bureaucracy far exceeds that of the EU administration.
"IIRC even the current size of the UK bureaucracy far exceeds that of the EU administration.".
About 33.000 for the EU and +400.000 for the UK.
"Bureaucrats", often called civil servants. are mostly hired and some amount of knowledge is demanded, not quite so with politicians.
(take Raab who suddenly found out about the traffic across the channel)
"This was inevitable, unless we want to fuck the economy into the toilet. "
The EU exports more to the UK than the UK sells to the EU. I think you (and Teresa May and other Remoaners) keep forgetting that. You also forget that most countries in the world are outside the EU, yet seem to get by just fine.
PS No one is ranting about "un-elected MEPS" as all Brexiteers know that MEPs are elected, but are essentially powerless.
@ Rich 11
"This was inevitable, unless we want to fuck the economy into the toilet"
"Some of you may not care that the NHS gets underfunded and understaffed yet further"
We are continuing to spend even more on the NHS than before the recession.
"or schools once more lose the capacity to provide non-leaking roofs"
Under PFI that is an issue of the private contractor.
"It would of course be easier simply not to leave the EU"
Simpler. Undemocratic. Unwise. Its simpler not to get out of bed in a morning but eventually you will die.
"If you haven't learned anything about such basic aspects of reality by now, you never will"
While I hold out hope that those determined not to see reality cant stay blind to it forever. Like when people wanted the Euro in this country.
It would of course be easier simply not to leave the EU.
And there is the crux of the matter. People want the easy option, even if it just leads to mediocrity and economic stagnation. The idea that a difficult choice which requires lots of hard work might be better in the future is just unacceptable. Much easier to let someone else do the work, and just tell you what do. Anything for a quiet life. Truly shameful.
Lessons to be learned:
- Never ask a question you don't want to hear the answer to.
- Never promise something that relies on other people's / country's / continent's co-operation.
- Never assume it's simple to undo decades of political wranglings and legal paperwork.
- Never take on a job that you don't actually want to do.
- Never stay in a job any longer than necessary once it becomes clear it's not what you want to do.
- Never piss off your allies without good cause.
What Europe need right now more than anything, is a good old fashend French Revolution. Instead of the King it would be the treacherous slimeball politicians who'd open their lands up to foreign invadors in the name of diversity, and cultural intragration. Of unminded People looking for a handout, and a place to spread their filth.
nothing would change.
Interpol has a mere fraction of the data floating in the Shengen system. It has information on every single stolen vehicle in the Eu, every single person of interest for pretty much any offence as well as a lot of stolen goods.
Compared to that Interpol red notices are only for stuff in the millions and people connected to them.
There is a common theme amidst 95% of terrorist incidents in Eu in the last decade - criminal record of the offenders before converting to the hard form of bearded lunacy. You can get that info from Shengen database. You cannot get it from Interpol.
It's clear we're never going to be allowed to leave the EU so your objective has been achieved.
RIP democracy. It was nice while it lasted!
What about democracy at an EU level? (Oh, that's the only one UKIP were ever successful at, yet they never bothered to try and fix the things they complained about.) What about democracy at the level of the UK nations, two of which voted to stay? What about democracy in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement referendum and the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, one built on the EU and the other won on a "project fear" of not being able to stay in it? What about democracy in a referendum fought largely on, "Well it'll be alright, obviously we can get a much better deal than Norway! Ha ha ha!"? What about the lack of democracy when the leave vote came through and the only decent thing to do in the limits of our system would have been an election fought on the basis of how we were going to leave? What about democracy in the general election we eventually got halfway through negotiation where the two teams we get to vote for didn't offer a choice? What about democracy where a self appointed cabal within the Conservative party tries to call the shots?
And what about democracy in asking people, once they have a chance to actually see what is going to be done in the name of a vote on an open ended course of action two years ago, if that's really what they wanted? No, of course, that wouldn't be democratic at all.
What about democracy at an EU level?
An excellent question. Where is it?
What about having an EU-wide referendum, to ask everyone in the EU if they want to continue towards "ever-closer union" and an eventual centrally-controlled superstate, or if they would prefer to return to a common market of friendly, sovereign neighbours, co-operating in a free trade area?
The EU won't ask, of course, because they're scared of what the answer would be, so please don't pretend that it's even close to being a democratic entity.
The European Parliament works far better than the Westminster one. The MEPs spend their time in committees, drawing up legislation across national and party lines, finding better solutions to the problems we face. I had a fascinating hour listening to the Swedish Green MEP explaining how her committee got the common fisheries policy changed to something sensible. They came up with a workable compromise they then sold to the rest of the MEPs, co-ordinating their reports with mass demonstrations outside led by Hugh Fearnley-Wittingstall.
In Westminster we have people shouting at each other in Parliament, with no power to change what the Government Ministers decide, all doing exactly what the whips tell them.
The times when the EU doesn't work is when the European Parliament is overruled by the Council of Ministers - i.e. the Ministers from each national government.
What we need is a civil war like the US had, to set up a proper working federal government.
I had a fascinating hour listening to the Swedish Green MEP explaining how her committee got the common fisheries policy changed to something sensible.
If only they'd spend all their time sorting out that sort of trade issue, instead of trying to impose a one-size-fits-all political solution on the whole continent. We might indeed be better off.
no power to change what the Government Ministers decide, all doing exactly what the whips tell them
Right about now I guess Theresa May wishes it really were that simple. But it isn't, of course.
>The EU won't ask, of course, because they're scared of what the answer would be
The answer would be yes - and don't forget there's five countries currently in the process of joining - six if you count Scotland (SNP had representatives at the last Accession talks)
The answer would be yes
Well, it might be in some of the small countries that get the subsidies. Not so much in the larger ones who pay for them, but even there it's an economic issue, not a political one. Of course, the idea was always that those smaller countries would eventually become net contributors, hasn't worked out that way though. Let's see what May 2019's elections bring.
don't forget there's five countries currently in the process of joining
I can't see Erdogan's Turkey ever getting in now, though, and it's debateable if the others actually want political union, rather than just free-trade membership.
>Not so much in the larger ones who pay for them
We're the most sceptical and even here it was close to 50:50 - and would be a remain majority according to all surveys were there another vote.
>Of course, the idea was always that those smaller countries would eventually become net contributors
That has never been the idea.
>I can't see Erdogan's Turkey ever getting in now
Zero chance under him - they stalled after budget alignment talks in 2016, but he's unlikely to last more than 10 years or so at worst. Accession is a slow process, the success of the EU is down to it's ability to plan over much longer timescales than national election cycles.
> and it's debateable if the others actually want political union
It really isn't.
The EU won't ask
Obviously we've been distracted by (to us) more immediate EU issues, but there's been a process going on in the EU to find a replacement for Jean-Claude Juncker. That process involves the EU parliament (which we elect and whose various party groupings have been picking their Spitzenkandidaten) and the Council of Ministers (representatives of national governments, which we also elect).
None of this has been much reported in the UK media, though the process has been widely covered in other EU countries. That's a considerably more democratic process than, for example, the appointment of the head of the British civil service.
I would concede that many people in the UK feel remote from the institutions that make decisions that affect them, but that's largely down to the lack of effective regional government in the UK: Transport for the North, for example, has no control over transport in the north and no ability to raise money to provide it; even in London, the Assembly has limited power beyond transport and some joint oversight of the police along with the Home Secretary. That's not the fault of Europe and the Brexit process (it if ever happens) will only concentrate power in Westminster even more.
If other EU countries wish to pursue "ever-closer union", they can. They can't make us join in and in fact only a minority of EU countries actually have aspirations in that direction. Ultimately, there'll have to be a "variable geometry" Europe to keep the project on the road and we have far better prospects if we remain the the EU and help to make that happen than by simply throwing our toys out of the pram.
One could add "Each new President is nominated by the European Council and formally elected by the European Parliament, for a five-year term".
It's a limited term and that is why a new President will be elected.
The European Council, charged with defining the European Union's (EU) overall political direction and priorities, is the institution of the EU that comprises the heads of state or government of the member states, along with the President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission.
You are right on the nail there (and sadly Gove is my MP)
What this whole thing will to is make certain that Corbyn is the PM after the next election. The Tory party is a dead duck. It will splinter into the hard right and the soft right factions.
The words of an old song come to mind when thinking about Corbyn as PM
"Another day older and deeper in debt"
We have no idea how he will finance his programme of nationalising everything in sight apart from the ususal 'tax the rich' as in anyone earning more than the Living Wage.
I really fear for the young people of this country as to what lies ahead. not all of us old farts voted to leave.
If I could leave the county I would but I have to care for my 97 year old Mother.
We are doomed as a country.
On a simplified note, it looks to me like the better of a bunch of bad options. As a member of the EU, we can't even begin to start proper trade talks with anyone. But after Brexit, as a "non-member" in a transition agreement, we can hold those trade talks. So by the time the transition period is over, we might actually have the beginnings of some trade deals in place and ready to go.
I also note the the most vocal politicians such as Reese-Mogge and Boris are more than rich enough to weather any economic downturn the hard Brexit they want will most likely cause. No possible deal, hard or soft was ever going to please everyone, not even close to majority. Especially considering that 48% or people voted not to leave in the first place, and the people who voted leave had a number of different reasons for leaving and visions of what leave meant.
I think what saddens me most about this whole sorry affair is the polarisation happening here that we see has already destroyed US politics. There's a lot of personal animosity between the various sides and very little actual discussion, or even listening to others points of view. Whatever else might happen, we are leaving the EU. Politicians of all sides should be looking at what is best for the country as a whole, not furthering the own agenda and appearing splintered and disorganised on the world stage. Argue in private, but at least try to put on some sort of united front in public. The squabbling not only gives the EU a stronger bargaining position, but also any potential trade partners we might want to deal with. A fully united UK is going to have a tough enough time getting a good deal with the US, especially with Trump in charge (his idea of good and fair is that he wins and the other guy loses big time), but a splintered UK Gov, will have no chance with him.
"As a member of the EU, we can't even begin to start proper trade talks with anyone"
Actually yes we can, we just cant sign them until the minute we leave.
"No possible deal, hard or soft was ever going to please everyone, not even close to majority"
Just as remain would have upset the majority (leave voters) as well as those various flavours of remain voter who want reform, just feared the govs punishment budget, fear of the EU, etc.
"Especially considering that 48% or people voted not to leave in the first place"
The minority. If this was an election that would be those who didnt win. The smaller group who do not get to impose their minority view on the people. The minority might not like that everyone else does not conform to their 'I am always right' view but tough. We had a democratic vote which has a result and thats it. But democracy relies on honourable people willing to pass power to the victor of the vote. It is a requirement.
"very little actual discussion, or even listening to others points of view."
That is 100% spot on. See above.
"It also depends on the ability to change one's mind, before too damage is done."
Actually no you are wrong. Who dictates what is damage and who dictates too much and who dictates their limited view as the right one? In a democracy such dictation is not the way which is why we have democratic votes. Unfortunately damage has been done with over 20 years without a say in being sold to the EU. Now we have changed our mind. After 3 votes to get it!
"I suppose we will just have a referendum every 5 years and probably rejoin in future."
Why? We have elections. If we elect politicians to rejoin then we will likely end up rejoining (probably without opt outs and with various ideas of what joining will mean).
"Whole point is elections are regular so people can change their mind, this referendum is a one off."
3 votes to get this result. 3. Not some piddly one referendum and that is after electing politicians promising such a choice for a number of elections before the last 2.
I think what saddens me most about this whole sorry affair is the polarisation happening here that we see has already destroyed US politics.
I have to agree with you, but it's not just in the UK. It's happening all across the EU. For the Brussels politicians there is only one valid viewpoint: "EU über alles". They seem blind to the way that is polarizing people, who have no moderate eurosceptic option. The result is that they go to the extremes, right and left, as the only way to say "slow down a minute, we don't like where the EU is going". That is incredibly dangerous for the future of Europe as a whole.
What nobody here (or apparently anyone in government circles) has noted yet is that loss of access to these national databases is only a part of the data processing debacle.
The EU position that an adequacy may be made during the transition period automatically implies that for quite some time between March 30th and the making of a decision British businesses will face serious complications, or indeed may be barred from, transferring personal data out of Europe and quite possibly also from processing any such data received if the processing involves onward transfers to other third countries.
In the worst case, the European party to such transfers will be at liberty to terminate the arrangement, and at best UK businesses will have to enter unfamiliar negotiations with the European side and undertake to fulfil novel responsibilities that nobody has yet explained authoritatively to them - and this with a mere four months to go before Brexit.
I've been pressing the authorities for quite some time to provide explicit reliable guidance before it's too late on what UK businesses have to do to ensure continued lawful transfers of personal data from the EU. But it could already be too late for many, particularly in the SMB sector where my professional experience shows that the entirety of data protection is still much of a mystery. So the inertia of the government in this could quite easily put small businesses out of business or force them to operate unlawfully in order to stay in business.
"The EU position that an adequacy may be made during the transition period automatically implies that for quite some time between March 30th and the making of a decision British businesses will face serious complications, or indeed may be barred from, transferring personal data out of Europe and quite possibly also from processing any such data received if the processing involves onward transfers to other third countries."
Most of the times I apply for a role in a big company anywhere in Europe after few days I am contacted by a British recruitment agency looking for contractors, a lot of time the agent happens to be Indian and sometimes they are even based in India (the agency having just the HQ in the UK). It's clear that my CV has been handed over without my consent to a third party, I often ask how they got it, they never reply, only once a recruiter admitted that he was outsourcing the pre-screening process and he retained my private details for his own business, when I complained he even protested that he had the right to do so. However I suspect that most of the times they don't get the CV while doing the screening, they just bribe HR employees. In this way without my consent my CV and my private details ended up in a lot of databases and often they ended up in countries like India that do not protect at all people privacy. It's not just privacy, once I clearly found evidence that an agency I never contacted was interfering with an application I made for a job and I suspect it happened a lot of times, but HR employees are tight lipped on these issues.
Therefore in my experience the sooner what you wrote happens the better it is.
As we’ve discovered GDPR has outlawed bulk (meta)data captured via port mirroring and upstream packet interrogation without warrant. It probably cost a fortune as well. We can also take Euro’s via the magic lamp, in fact there’s a probably a fortune stuck down the sofa. Also UK will remain co-joined by infrastructure though with infrastructure peering partner. A least data footprint has also never been a bad thing as proved several times. I discovered all this by the way watching Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure, highly recommended and five stars. #platoonthedoorsocratesonthewheels
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019