Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Dr The Singh]

I said this would happen, rep me mutherfoookers

[Thracian]

On 9/7/2016 at 15:56, Buce said:

 

Apart from the Polish guy murdered in Harlow, you mean?

 

Or the two Polish guys hospitalised on the day of his funeral?

 

On 9/15/2016 at 23:45, Dr The Singh said:

This fooking shit, scares me to shit, I'm so glad we're out

Or at least intending to be. I just wish we'd get on with it. Everything Juncker says confirms my dislike of the EU agenda.     

[Guest MattP]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-will-boost-britain-ays-german-business-chief-j5kcw7fh5

 

Brexit will boost Britain, says German business chief

UK economy could overtake Europe in three years, says media boss

 

Britain will emerge from Brexit with a stronger economy and be better off than other EU countries within five years, one of Germany’s most prominent businessmen has said.

Leaving the EU will make Britain a more attractive destination to foreign investors, according to Mathias Döpfner, chief executive of Axel Springer, the publishing house.

In an intervention that will be seized on by cabinet ministers arguing for a “hard” approach to Brexit, he suggested that being free of EU rules would allow Britain to implement a “very healthy . . . talent-orientated” immigration policy. “You basically integrate and invite the people that you benefit from and not people who only benefit from your social welfare system,” he said.

He warned that the EU would suffer disproportionately from losing Britain’s “healthy” influence. “I very simply think that in the long run continental Europe may suffer more from Brexit than England itself,” he said. “We should not take this whole Brexit decision as a way to blame the Brits. We should take it like a wake-up call for Europe to refresh its political approach. I count on the pragmatism and the free-market orientation of the British people and they will find ways to attract foreign investment and be an important business hub.”

[Sharpe's Fox]

Good article here on @MattP heartthrob Daniel Hannan:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/29/daniel-hannan-the-man-who-brought-you-brexit

 

he's a cvnt, but a clever cvnt

[bovril]

26 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Good article here on @MattP heartthrob Daniel Hannan:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/29/daniel-hannan-the-man-who-brought-you-brexit

 

 

  Hide contents

he's a cvnt, but a clever cvnt

 

Read that this morning over coffee. The 'long reads' in the Guardian are still very good.

[Guest MattP]

25 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Good article here on @MattP heartthrob Daniel Hannan:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/29/daniel-hannan-the-man-who-brought-you-brexit

 

 

  Hide contents

he's a cvnt, but a clever cvnt

 

A kinder, gentler politics.

 

Thanks for the link, really enjoyed it, he's even more of a hearthrob now after reading that, I knew he had worked hard for this but I didn't realise how hard, I just hope the bit about him retiring from politics isn't true, he should be in the Conservative cabinet somewhere and I hope they find him a seat in 2020, can you imagine him against the dross inside the Labour party, it would be humiliating.

[Sharpe's Fox]

42 minutes ago, MattP said:

A kinder, gentler politics.

 

Thanks for the link, really enjoyed it, he's even more of a hearthrob now after reading that, I knew he had worked hard for this but I didn't realise how hard, I just hope the bit about him retiring from politics isn't true, he should be in the Conservative cabinet somewhere and I hope they find him a seat in 2020, can you imagine him against the dross inside the Labour party, it would be humiliating.

No worries. Maybe you should get on with more from the Guardian. Within one week you'll be eating orgainic quinoa, in two you'll be reading Simone de Beauvoir. A month in you'll be a fully fledged Corbynista sporting a Momentum membership pamphlet and a "Jez We Can" t-shirt, fair-trade cotton of course.

[Buce]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/29/brexit-royal-yacht-britannia-eu

 

Only Polly Toynbee, so we'll ignore it, eh?

 

 

[Guest MattP]

8 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

No worries. Maybe you should get on with more from the Guardian. Within one week you'll be eating orgainic quinoa, in two you'll be reading Simone de Beauvoir. A month in you'll be a fully fledged Corbynista sporting a Momentum membership pamphlet and a "Jez We Can" t-shirt, fair-trade cotton of course.

I've already started, I've bought the Jeremy Corbyn colouring and joke book for a friend for Xmas, I've also made my first journey into Costa Coffee (I need a more tax friendly company though) to relax read for an hour a few weeks back, by the age of 40 you'll see me covered in paint at a Fracking protest.

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/29/brexit-royal-yacht-britannia-eu

 

Only Polly Toynbee, so we'll ignore it, eh?

Whether we spend public money on this is certainly something that should be subject to debate.

 

The problem with Polly Toynbee is it's hard to take her serious, she calls us a laughing stock whilst lauding the politics of Guy Werhofstadt, she complains about selective education whilst paying for her own kids to go to private schools, she bemoans lack of housing whilst owning three of her own, she lectures on global warming whilst flying six times a year to her holiday home in Tuscany,

 

She knows perfectly well that her readership at the Guardian has nothing better to do that feel guilty over the comfortable lives they lead, but when you do those things and spout them to the general population you are going to lose all credibility with the public. Who cares what she's thinks on Brexit anyway? She's got everything wrong anyway since I've taken notice of things she has said.

 

 

[Buce]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Whether we spend public money on this is certainly something that should be subject to debate.

 

The problem with Polly Toynbee is it's hard to take her serious, she calls us a laughing stock whilst lauding the politics of Guy Werhofstadt, she complains about selective education whilst paying for her own kids to go to private schools, she bemoans lack of housing whilst owning three of her own, she lectures on global warming whilst flying six times a year to her holiday home in Tuscany,

 

She knows perfectly well that her readership at the Guardian has nothing better to do that feel guilty over the comfortable lives they lead, but when you do those things and spout them to the general population you are going to lose all credibility with the public. Who cares what she's thinks on Brexit anyway? She's got everything wrong anyway since I've taken notice of things she has said.

 

 

Whether you like her (which you clearly don't), it doesn't necessarily follow that her points are invalid.

 

This 'Brexit' is fast becoming a fiasco; the govt seems clueless about what they want to happen, or how to make anything happen.

[Webbo]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

Whether you like her (which you clearly don't), it doesn't necessarily follow that her points are invalid.

 

This 'Brexit' is fast becoming a fiasco; the govt seems clueless about what they want to happen, or how to make anything happen.

Why are they clueless? They've said it'll be next year before they trigger A50 and they've said that they won't be giving a running commentary on negotiations. The idea that because they don't tell us what's going on they don't know what they're doing is just paper talk.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Why are they clueless? They've said it'll be next year before they trigger A50 and they've said that they won't be giving a running commentary on negotiations. The idea that because they don't tell us what's going on they don't know what they're doing is just paper talk.

I really didn't expect you to say any differently, Webbo.

 

No offence.

[Webbo]

Just now, Buce said:

I really didn't expect you to say any differently, Webbo.

 

No offence.

I'm not offended I just don't see where this "they don't know what they're doing" is coming from?

[ousefox]

8 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I'm not offended I just don't see where this "they don't know what they're doing" is coming from?

Ken Clarke

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Watson said:

Ken Clarke

Well he's not bias in any way.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I'm not offended I just don't see where this "they don't know what they're doing" is coming from?

Because they aren't making a detailed, transparent step by step explanation of the process public? 

 

Rightly or wrongly, keeping things opaque in that way is always going to lead to people wondering about the process and the competence of the people managing it, otherwise you would just be expecting blind faith.

 

It's the same with most other areas of public service that are not open to public accountability - they may well know exactly what they're doing and do a very good job, but not making the details clear and open always leaves such practice open to questions about what goes on ostensibly in the name of people and country.

[Webbo]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Because they aren't making a detailed, transparent step by step explanation of the process public? 

 

Rightly or wrongly, keeping things opaque in that way is always going to lead to people wondering about the process and the competence of the people managing it, otherwise you would just be expecting blind faith.

 

It's the same with most other areas of public service that are not open to public accountability - they may well know exactly what they're doing and do a very good job, but not making the details clear and open always leaves such practice open to questions about what goes on ostensibly in the name of people and country.

I see it as negotiation tactics. David Davies says we're not bothered about being in the single market that one threat taken away from the other side. Teresa May says that's not official policy, she's keeping our options open.

 

Add the fact that a lot of conservative MPs were for remain and the govt has a small majority, she can't just come out and offend one side or the other. It's going to be difficult but that doesn't mean there isn't a plan.

[Smudge]

 

9 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Because they aren't making a detailed, transparent step by step explanation of the process public? 

 

Rightly or wrongly, keeping things opaque in that way is always going to lead to people wondering about the process and the competence of the people managing it, otherwise you would just be expecting blind faith.

 

It's the same with most other areas of public service that are not open to public accountability - they may well know exactly what they're doing and do a very good job, but not making the details clear and open always leaves such practice open to questions about what goes on ostensibly in the name of people and country.

The vote was taken 3 months or so ago, there were no contingency plans, which in of itself was ludicrous but there you have it. That can't be undone.

 

You can't conceive a plan of such magnitude in a short space of time. It will take months for all the possible outcomes to be evaluated and then a strategy formed. The last thing we need is a plan thrown together in haste.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

I see it as negotiation tactics. David Davies says we're not bothered about being in the single market that one threat taken away from the other side. Teresa May says that's not official policy, she's keeping our options open.

 

Add the fact that a lot of conservative MPs were for remain and the govt has a small majority, she can't just come out and offend one side or the other. It's going to be difficult but that doesn't mean there isn't a plan.

That makes sense, and it also means that during the transition they have to accept the skepticism of varying parts of the populace as acceptable cost of the process rather than thinking people won't question.

[Guest MattP]

The idea the government is going to reveal it's negotiating strategy is ridiculous. You wouldn't sit down at a poker table and tell everyone how you are going to bet before the cards have been dealt.

 

The SNP, Lib Dems and people like Ken Clarke are continually pushing this line to try and force some sort of second referendum or even government vote on it.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

The idea the government is going to reveal it's negotiating strategy is ridiculous. You wouldn't sit down at a poker table and tell everyone how you are going to bet before the cards have been dealt.

 

The SNP, Lib Dems and people like Ken Clarke are continually pushing this line to try and force some sort of second referendum or even government vote on it.

Agreed, but as above, with that in mind it's equally ridiculous to expect everyone to just trust in and not express doubt in the government on this one until the game is over and they've won, as it were.

 

Skepticism and wondering if they truly know what they're doing is a simple and should be expected consequence of the path they're taking.

[foxinexile]

The only "plan" I ever heard about for Brexit was £350 million a week to the NHS ... and it took a matter of hours after the referendum result for some of the main figureheads to begin retracting that promise ... 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/

 

The reality is not that we are not showing our hand as such to risk weakening negotiations: the reality is we have no plan; we never had one from the start. I find the government's position incredibly arrogant. The majority of voters voted to leave ... and yet we have a Prime Minster saying this will not be actioned until next year at the earliest. Even as someone who voted remain, I would prefer they would just get on with it. But then again, if you have no plan, how can you action something? The voices that are speaking continuously give conflicting opinions ... "hard" Brexit; remaining a full member of the single market; remaining a part member; separate trade deals with individual EU members ... it goes on. And these are not just commentators from the sideline, these are members of the government. If there can be such varying opinions on such an incredibly important issue such as this, how on earth can we expect an agreed deal on the thousands of other areas that will require negotiation?

 

Nothing would make me happier for Britain to come out of this stronger than before and for my own concerns to be dismissed. But I can't help feel we are sleepwalking towards a flawed resolution in one of this country's most important moments. The impression I get is that no one really has a clue about a plan of action post-EU (I have yet to hear anyone set out a concise, valid course for us) but I guess if it does go wrong (and it is still an 'if' at present) then no doubt Farridge, Johnson, Goooove et al will rear up and lay the blame squarely at the EU's door. Farridge has already laid the groundwork for this by complaining that the EU's main Brexit negotiator is anti-Britain.

 

Our actions so far do not give me faith.

 

[bovril]

Bit depressing everything is always discussed in terms of what "we / they can get out of it".

[The Doctor]

7 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Good article here on @MattP heartthrob Daniel Hannan:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/29/daniel-hannan-the-man-who-brought-you-brexit

 

 

  Hide contents

he's a cvnt, but a clever cvnt

 

Doesn't come across as particularly clever in that - One of the few times I'll agree with Farage and his spokesman; if Hannan genuinely believes the vote for leave was driven by our political history, ruling empires with a civil service of 52 and how many nobel prize winners Cambridge has produced rather than by immigration and the perceived knock-on effect on wages and employment prospects then he is an idiot, stuck far from reality - and the only difference between him and the remain campaign is his side were better at manipulating people.