Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[tebee]

Still, it's lucky the referendum was only advisory....... 

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Still having nightmares. Desperately hoping against hope that Brexit will not happen ?

 

Why are you shouting about people not knowing what they voted for ?

 

It was spelled out very clearly in a £9 million Government referendum leaflet. If you did not receive one, or have forgotten what it says, because I am a nice guy, here is a copy to refresh your memory.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

 

2 main points that remainers are oblivious to

 

 

Not that difficult to understand. 

Great leaflet!

 

My how the government has changed!

 

BTW it states remaining in the EU ensures membership of the single market. Nowhere does it state that leaving the EU means leaving the single market. Customs union is not even mentioned.

 

So I think many people did not equate leaving the EU with leaving the single market or the customs union.

 

not that difficult to understand ?

[The Renegade]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

Still, it's lucky the referendum was only advisory....... 

 

12 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide. If you’re aged 18 or over by 23rd June and are entitled to vote, this is your chance to decide.

Yes, when you are a straw clutcher.

 

The statement is very clear and very unambiguous.

 

Perhaps the quote should have been:

 

Quote

Please remember that this Referendum is only advisory and we might implement what you decide.

 

[The Renegade]

 

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

not that difficult to understand ?

It certainly is for remainers.

 

My apologies, I forgot how their education levels are so superior that they cannot think laterally and need every single little detail described in minute detail before they can grasp the concept of anything.

 

A vote to remain will mean remaining in the Single Market,  those that have even the smallest ability to think laterally understands the opposite, a vote to leave will meaning leaving the Single Market.

[tebee]

So, you present this document as proof positive that everyone voted for the hardest of hard brexits  - if you are so sure about that why have the government spent the last 2 years negotiating for a completely different brexit ?

[Eloquent pilgrim]

46 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Still having nightmares. Desperately hoping against hope that Brexit will not happen ?

 

Why are you shouting about people not knowing what they voted for ?

 

It was spelled out very clearly in a £9 million Government referendum leaflet. If you did not receive one, or have forgotten what it says, because I am a nice guy, here is a copy to refresh your memory.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

 

2 main points that remainers are oblivious to

 

 

Not that difficult to understand. 

Absolutely, right on the money; the leaflet was said to have cost the taxpayer about £9 million. It gave the remain campaign a huge and unfair advantage, by promoting a remain vote and denigrating a leave vote.

 

This leaflet also contravened the Code of Good Practice on Referendums of the Council of Europe, of which the UK is a founding member.

 

This is a quote from the Council of Europe paper on referendums:

 

***13. The situation is different in the case of referendums, since it is legitimate for the different organs of government to convey their viewpoint in the debate for or against the text put to the vote. They must not abuse their position, however. In any event, the use of public funds for campaigning purposes must be prohibited in order to guarantee equality of opportunity and the freedom of voters to form an opinion***

 

However, despite this significant advantage, as we all know, the electorate said, thanks for the advice, but we’re out of here.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Eloquent pilgrim

[Orac]

32 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

 

It certainly is for remainers.

 

My apologies, I forgot how their education levels are so superior that they cannot think laterally and need every single little detail described in minute detail before they can grasp the concept of anything.

 

A vote to remain will mean remaining in the Single Market,  those that have even the smallest ability to think laterally understands the opposite, a vote to leave will meaning leaving the Single Market.

 

Are you sure?

 

 

[The Renegade]

9 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

This is a quote from the Council of Europe paper on referendums:

 

***13. The situation is different in the case of referendums, since it is legitimate for the different organs of government to convey their viewpoint in the debate for or against the text put to the vote. They must not abuse their position, however. In any event, the use of public funds for campaigning purposes must be prohibited in order to guarantee equality of opportunity and the freedom of voters to form an opinion***

Interesting.

 

Although in the balance of fairness, it could equally be argued that the £9million Referendum leaflet was an information leaflet and not actually campaigning.

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

Are you sure?

 

 

Man, that is superb.

 

Although I have no idea how it relates to the official £9 million referendum leaflet that I refer to.

 

I learned not to listen to politicians at least 30 years ago.

[Orac]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

Man, that is superb.

 

Although I have no idea how it relates to the official £9 million referendum leaflet that I refer to.

 

I learned not to listen to politicians at least 30 years ago.

 

Neither do I since you have not mentioned the £9m in the post I was replying to. What you said, just to remind you, and what it does clearly relate to is your statement

 

”A vote to remain will mean remaining in the Single Market,  those that have even the smallest ability to think laterally understands the opposite, a vote to leave will meaning leaving the Single Market.”

[Orac]

Seems Brexit is getting more like Thailand by the day




Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Eloquent pilgrim]

39 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Interesting.

 

Although in the balance of fairness, it could equally be argued that the £9million Referendum leaflet was an information leaflet and not actually campaigning.

 

Well, I think you need a lot of poetic license to consider the leaflet merely information. It was entitled “Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK” which in itself is a misrepresentation, because many members of government did not believe that.

 

It then went on, as I’m sure you know, to advocate remaining on every issue it covered, so heavily biased and hardly impartial and objective, which an information only leaflet should have been.

 

In the balance of fairness, there should have been another taxpayer funded leaflet "Why some members of the government believes that voting to leave the EU is the best decision for the UK" pointing out the views of government members that advocated leaving

Edited May 16, 2018 by Eloquent pilgrim

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

 

It certainly is for remainers.

 

My apologies, I forgot how their education levels are so superior that they cannot think laterally and need every single little detail described in minute detail before they can grasp the concept of anything.

 

A vote to remain will mean remaining in the Single Market,  those that have even the smallest ability to think laterally understands the opposite, a vote to leave will meaning leaving the Single Market.

"Remaining inside the EU guarantees our full access to its Single Market. By contrast, leaving creates uncertainty and risk." 

 

To me that states that by remaining, we keep full access. Leaving would mean a a risk that we might not have full access.

 

However, as we now know, we may, if we so wish retain full access a la Norway

 

Again, customs union is not discussed nor its requirement for JIT in the auto industry or how it effects the NI border.

 

So, no, I don't think Brexiters understood all of the issues prior to the referendum. 

 

I will ignore your churlish comment about "superior education"

[tebee]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

....

 

So, no, I don't think Brexiters understood all of the issues prior to the referendum. 

 

....

 I don't think anybody understood all of the issues prior to the referendum.

[Grouse]

What is the downside of remains in the single market?

 

Anybody?

 

Speak up!

[The Renegade]

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Again, customs union is not discussed nor its requirement for JIT in the auto industry or how it effects the NI border.

It does not effect the NI Border. 

 

The NI Border was an issue brought up by Barmier by the day Barnier and the EU, in an attempt to thwart the Brexit process. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

The idea behind this Border is to protect the EU's magical Customs Union.

 

If the EU wants its magical Customs Union protected, it can build, police and pay for this Border.

 

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

[oldhippy]

1 hour ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Exactly, you don't know; but, that didn't stop you from posting a photo (that we have all seen before) for sensationalist and moralising effect.

  

“They could be fleeing war”  …… yes they could be, but you don't know that, do you ?

 

We can all speculate; they could equally be fleeing low income jobs, unemployment and an uncertain financial future; while this is understandable and deserving of sympathy, it does not mean they are refugees. You, however, seem to be in complete denial that economic migrants even exist, and consider anyone from anywhere trying to get into Europe as a refugee, which is unhelpful in the debate as to how the two different groups should be treated.

1/ I did nor say "they could be fleeing war" --- I said that I do not know which war they are fleeing from, as they all look the same (sarcasm I repeat...).

2/ I am not in denial that economic migrants exist --- I think that people in subhuman living conditions have to right to improve their conditions (just like the Europeans that once upon a time fled to the Americas).

3/ I have previously said that the solution for stopping the migrants was investment in Africa and to stop wars for oil and minerals.

 

 

[Orac]

It does not effect the NI Border. 
 
The NI Border was an issue brought up by Barmier by the day Barnier and the EU, in an attempt to thwart the Brexit process. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
The idea behind this Border is to protect the EU's magical Customs Union.
 
If the EU wants its magical Customs Union protected, it can build, police and pay for this Border.
 
Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

If you exclude CU then surely a hard border post would be a requirement as it is already for Switzerland and between Norway and Sweden.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

If you exclude CU then surely a hard border post would be a requirement as it is already for Switzerland and between Norway and Sweden.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

As I took the time to point out .The requirement is on the EU's side, not the UK's side.

 

7 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

The NI Border was an issue brought up by Barmier by the day Barnier and the EU, in an attempt to thwart the Brexit process. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

The idea behind this Border is to protect the EU's magical Customs Union.

 

If the EU wants its magical Customs Union protected, it can build, police and pay for this Border.

 

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

Try reading this, it explains why this Border is a non starter.

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/close-sweden-norway-ties-despite-eu-border-dividing-them-1.2683072

[tebee]

9 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

It does not effect the NI Border. 

 

The NI Border was an issue brought up by Barmier by the day Barnier and the EU, in an attempt to thwart the Brexit process. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

The idea behind this Border is to protect the EU's magical Customs Union.

 

If the EU wants its magical Customs Union protected, it can build, police and pay for this Border.

 

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

Barnier was merely pointing out that under WTO rules ( as well as EU rules)  there is a legal requirement to have border posts and inspections if you have differing customs regimes or regulatory requirements in two adjoining counties. 

 

The problem is the British government has also signed up to the Good Friday Agreement which prohibits such customs checks.

 

It's a problem the British government has created. The EU has already offered to let NI exceptionally stay in the CU and SM if the UK leaves. There is no other easy solution without breaking treaty obligations  

[Grouse]

16 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

It does not effect the NI Border. 

 

The NI Border was an issue brought up by Barmier by the day Barnier and the EU, in an attempt to thwart the Brexit process. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

The idea behind this Border is to protect the EU's magical Customs Union.

 

If the EU wants its magical Customs Union protected, it can build, police and pay for this Border.

 

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

Unless there are precisely equal "trading conditions" on both sides there must be a border. BTW how do you propose stopping movement across a virtual border?

[Orac]

Try reading this, it explains why this Border is a non starter.
 
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/close-sweden-norway-ties-despite-eu-border-dividing-them-1.2683072

The article seems to make very clear why a border is required:

“But Swedish and Norwegian officials say these ties have remained strong because of unique cross-border agreements in place long before Sweden’s EU membership. And even those arrangements cannot undo the customs border, with all the cost and bureaucracy that involves.”




Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

 

The article seems to make very clear why a border is required:

“But Swedish and Norwegian officials say these ties have remained strong because of unique cross-border agreements in place long before Sweden’s EU membership. And even those arrangements cannot undo the customs border, with all the cost and bureaucracy that involves.”




Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

Did you read the part about the smuggling ?

 

A hard border will only open up the 1000's of old smuggling routes that were opened up all around Ireland.

 

A border will make no difference to the Irish people, they will still trade.

[Orac]

Did you read the part about the smuggling ?
 
A hard border will only open up the 1000's of old smuggling routes that were opened up all around Ireland.
 
A border will make no difference to the Irish people, they will still trade.

Yes. There will always be some smuggling as it is virtually impossible to stamp out as the article does point out between SE/NO though they still have that border.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[soalbundy]

4 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Did you read the part about the smuggling ?

 

A hard border will only open up the 1000's of old smuggling routes that were opened up all around Ireland.

 

A border will make no difference to the Irish people, they will still trade.

A lucrative job, tax free, ought to take care of any unemployment.

[The Renegade]

20 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Unless there are precisely equal "trading conditions" on both sides there must be a border. BTW how do you propose stopping movement across a virtual border?

I will answer that, when you answer this

 

40 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

Should be fairly simple and easy for a person of your calibre.

[tebee]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

I will answer that, when you answer this

Now take the time to spell out how you can possibly discuss a border when you have no idea what the future trading relationship is going to entail.

Should be fairly simple and easy for a person of your calibre.

We have no time left to negotiate anything now,  so we must assume the default option, hard Brexit.

 

Unless:- 

 

We agree to the proposed EU NI deal.

 

We have Irish unification

 

We abandon Brexit 

[The Renegade]

6 minutes ago, tebee said:

We have no time left to negotiate anything now,  so we must assume the default option, hard Brexit.

Without a doubt.

 

So let us forget all this thwart Brexit nonsense., crying crocodile tears and trying to throw spanners into the works.

 

Exit March 2019, no extension and WTO rules. Something that will focus the minds of the EU.

 

You would think that they would start getting the message by now, that there is an inherent problem with the EU.

 

It has already led to Brexit.

 

Hungary, Poland, Austria, Italy now coming out with Italy First.

 

Quote

Italy’s far-right League, struggling to stitch together a coalition deal with the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement, said on Tuesday it was ready to wage war on European Union budget rules and put Italians first.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-politics/struggling-to-agree-on-government-pact-italys-league-turns-on-eu-idUSKCN1IG1VD?il=0

 

You would have thought that the EU might have learned something. They somehow think more EU is the answer.

[oldhippy]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

He is from Belgium and does like being rude to the Brits, some might call it it baiting and how he gets away it is another question. Most people ignore him.

QUOTE: and how he gets away it is another question.

You are lucky that I am not a grammar nazi, or I could rip you to shreds.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

Why I am interested in Brexit? I have answered that before.

Would you please remind me why a non-Brit is interested in Brexit...Just for my gray cells...Thanks...