Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[The Renegade]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

Simmerly I could probably probably get behind something like an EEA Brexit,

EEA means under the control of Brussels and the ECJ and being subject to the free movement of people.

 

Remainers cannot understand that this is not Brexit, hence the reason the keep squealing about the EEA.

[aright]

14 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

The Ireland border is the Achilles Heel for the Hard Brexiteers. Overthrowing Theresa May would force them to take ownership of the Irish problem and nobody on the HB side is prepared to drink that poisoned chalice, so they prod away hoping to wound her until some more propitious moment which may never come other than post-Brexit when they will start screaming betrayal.

I think the Irish Border is more of an internal problem than a TM problem.

It would be a tremendous boost for the Republican movement if a hard border was avoided and  if it were to come about would force the Unionists to make an invidious choice between their political views and their economic interests. Given that choice I think people would choose economics over politics which would probably over time result in a united Ireland.  

 

 

[tebee]

7 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

I see now why you are so confused tebee.

 

You are 2 weeks behind where you should be.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2018/jun/20/brexit-theresa-may-faces-meaningful-vote-crunch-day-politics-live

 

The Lords amendments were already dealt with the week previous.

 

And here is the Withdrawal Bill

 

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0005/18005.pdf

 

Perhaps now you can quit speculating and posting YOUR thoughts as FACTS

You are getting the greive amendment (17) mixed up with the NI one (25) 

 

See this for what was passed or rejected. 

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/eu-withdrawal-bill-amendments-and-debates

 

MPs accepted the Government’s amendment in lieu. This amends the Lords’ clause to refer to the North-South co-operation in the Belfast Agreement (rather than list the specific areas of co-operation) and reduces the list of new border arrangements to include “physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls”. It also says this should be subject to an agreement between the UK and the EU rather than the UK and Ireland.

 

 

That appears to be an out of date version of the bill - it says Ordered, by The House of Commons,to be Printed, 13 July 2017.

[The Renegade]

Just now, tebee said:

You are getting the greive amendment (17) mixed up with the NI one (25) 

 

See this for what was passed or rejected. 

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/eu-withdrawal-bill-amendments-and-debates

 

MPs accepted the Government’s amendment in lieu. This amends the Lords’ clause to refer to the North-South co-operation in the Belfast Agreement (rather than list the specific areas of co-operation) and reduces the list of new border arrangements to include “physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls”. It also says this should be subject to an agreement between the UK and the EU rather than the UK and Ireland.

 

 

That appears to be an out of date version of the bill - it says Ordered, by The House of Commons,to be Printed, 13 July 2017.

tebee

 

Read what it says

 

13 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

The attempt to secure a “meaningful vote” that could have potentially given MPs the power to stop Britain leaving the EU without a deal has been defeated. The final obstacle to the EU withdrawal bill was removed as MPs voted 303 to 319 against an amendment tabled by the former attorney general Dominic Grieve

The final obstacle to the EU withdrawal bill was removed ......

 

The Lords amendments that you continually refer to had all previously dealt with and are dead and buried.

 

You are clinging on for dear life to outdated information.

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

Bigoted against who, exactly?

 

 

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Everyone a remainer to a man! ?

 

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

I wouldn't worry about it. The actual poster does not know what it means either.

[nontabury]

28 minutes ago, tebee said:

There are people on here - and in the government (JRM,Borris) who are advocating a hard Brexit - it's mad I know, but that is what they want.

 

The EU is legalistic and it doesn't see the necessity to bend those laws for the benefit of a country  which will be leaving. If our government could decide what it wants and where it's red lines lie we could maybe arrange something, but It's so divided now I can't see it happening in time.

 

Simmerly I could probably probably get behind something like an EEA Brexit, though any flavor is going to be worse than what we have, but us remainers are reluctant to support any Brexit when we don't know what it means. 

 

 

In your opinion they’re advocating a hard Brexit. While in the real world, they are simple stating what will happen if the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels continue to dictate to the U.K. The word is negotiate, and that means both sides.

[RuamRudy]

24 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

 

I don't believe that she has actually gone on record as saying that, has she? You wouldn't be making up stories to back an earlier claim that was palpably untrue, would you?

Edited June 22, 2018 by RuamRudy

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Actually, listening to James O'Brien's programs where he has to deal with the myriad fruitcake Hard Brexiteers and various Conspiracy Theorists throwing their wobbles on the phone-in is absolutely great and hilarious to boot. Odd how so many forum Brexiteers seem to be cut from the same cloth.

 

Has to deal with? Cobblers, he just jumps on anyone with a different view and mutes them out while he rants on.

 

O'Brien is a complete and utter cretin. No wonder you love him. 

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Has to deal with? Cobblers, he just jumps on anyone with a different view and mutes them out while he rants on.

 

O'Brien is a complete and utter cretin. No wonder you love him. 

I presume that you, too, are unable to challenge his point so resort to attacking the man himself?

[CG1 Blue]

5 hours ago, tebee said:

 

I was addressing the comment to those that want a hard brexit. It is the their instance on having nothing to do with the EU that causes the problem. A soft brexit could avoid it

Can you explain which of the things that Leavers voted for would be delivered in a soft Brexit? For example:

 

- Ability to strike trade deals with other nations

- No EU laws forced upon us

- Reclaim fishing waters

- Come out of the CAP

- No ECJ jurisdiction

- No contributions to the EU budget

- No free movement of people

 

What would a soft Brexit deliver from the above list?

 

 

[nauseus]

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I presume that you, too, are unable to challenge his point so resort to attacking the man himself?

What point? The point I make is about O'Brien himself. If you have a different opinion don't expect to get a word in. No room for debate - no point in listening.  

[CG1 Blue]

5 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

6 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Well okay then, in that case, let's examine the stunningly informative tweet from the literary genius, James O’Brien, that you think puts it very succinctly

 

He tweeted

***Yup. If you stop paying £20 for your pitch at the car boot sale where you make a profit of £200 every week, then you are obviously £20 a week better off ***

 

So, to show how weak your position actually is, if you can't write something more edifying than this yourself, and have to resort to posting this drivel from somebody else, you really do have much more to worry about than Brexit

You really are struggling here - my suggestion is that you accept that you have nothing constructive to add, and simply drop it. On the other hand, of course, feel free to continue to dig.

 

Should you wish to do so, perhaps you can explain what is unedifying and uninformative about him making a pertinent, accessible analogy to demonstrate how ludicrous a position that Rees Mogg is taking?

 

And drivel? Why do you consider it drivel? The definition of drivel is 'silly nonsense'. What aspect of his tweet is silly nonsense?

But that O'Brien analogy (like most of his smug analogies) does not work. One would be paying the 20 quid a week, and not be allowed to sell at any other boot sales, following restrictive rules, thus constraining the ability to increase profits beyond 200 quid. And to make it worse you'd have to let everyone share your house.

He's not as clever as he is in his imagination.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

And you continue with the 'generalised' insults!.....

 

Surely you're not 'trollling' - hoping for personal insults in response - that you can report to the mods. in the hope of getting the thread closed again.... ☹️ ?

Wow! A six pack hard-core Brexiter like! And totally incorrect.

 

And another thing, there are relatively few Brits working in other EU countries; why is that? Monoglotism? Shyness? Inadequate skills? I can understand Yorkshire folk wanting to stay put a la Yorkshire Airlines though

 

Maybe solution is freedom of movement for graduates or other suitably qualified people only?

[The Renegade]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Maybe solution is freedom of movement for graduates or other suitably qualified people only?

Bravo, wonderful, wunderbar, the penny finally drops. 

 

This is also universally known as Controlled Migration, usually via a work permit, for the people who have the qualifications, skills and experience that a Country needs.

[Jip99]

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

 

And another thing, there are relatively few Brits working in other EU countries; why is that?

 

 

Jeez....... you are dumber than I thought !

 

If you can't work out why the imbalance of economic migration is in the direction the UK, then there is no hope for you.

[tebee]

35 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Can you explain which of the things that Leavers voted for would be delivered in a soft Brexit? For example:

 

- Ability to strike trade deals with other nations

- No EU laws forced upon us

- Reclaim fishing waters

- Come out of the CAP

- No ECJ jurisdiction

- No contributions to the EU budget

- No free movement of people

 

What would a soft Brexit deliver from the above list?

 

 

None - so you are one of those who want a hard brexit even if it means many losing their jobs ?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

I wouldn't worry about it. The actual poster does not know what it means either.

Oh I do and so do you ?

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Bravo, wonderful, wunderbar, the penny finally drops. 

 

This is also universally known as Controlled Migration, usually via a work permit, for the people who have the qualifications, skills and experience that a Country needs.

Fine, let's agree on that! But keep in simple, free movement for anyone with a degree! The work permit stuff is too difficult and complex. My idea solves the problem at a stroke. Spud badgers have to stay home, engineer's and scientists can move around with impunity.

Edited June 22, 2018 by Grouse

[aright]

21 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Wow! A six pack hard-core Brexiter like! And totally incorrect.

 

And another thing, there are relatively few Brits working in other EU countries; why is that? Monoglotism? Shyness? Inadequate skills? I can understand Yorkshire folk wanting to stay put a la Yorkshire Airlines though

 

Maybe solution is freedom of movement for graduates or other suitably qualified people only?

Well done! You are half way there, freedom of movement for the immigrants we need and qualified political immigrants is what we voted for. How can we help with the rest of the package? You only have to ask.

[The Renegade]

19 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Bravo, wonderful, wunderbar, the penny finally drops. 

 

This is also universally known as Controlled Migration, usually via a work permit, for the people who have the qualifications, skills and experience that a Country needs.

 

7 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Fine, let's agree on that!

So you agree that staying in the SM or CU or membership of the EEA or EFTA is not an option ?

Edited June 22, 2018 by The Renegade

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Jeez....... you are dumber than I thought !

 

If you can't work out why the imbalance of economic migration is in the direction the UK, then there is no hope for you.

Maybe I am dumb. If so explain to me why more Brits are not working in the EU? We're not talking about spud bashers though.

[tebee]

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

In your opinion they’re advocating a hard Brexit. While in the real world, they are simple stating what will happen if the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels continue to dictate to the U.K. The word is negotiate, and that means both sides.

 

47 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Can you explain which of the things that Leavers voted for would be delivered in a soft Brexit? For example:

 

- Ability to strike trade deals with other nations

- No EU laws forced upon us

- Reclaim fishing waters

- Come out of the CAP

- No ECJ jurisdiction

- No contributions to the EU budget

- No free movement of people

 

What would a soft Brexit deliver from the above list?

 

 

So Mr CG1  blue here - is he not advocating a hard Brexit ? doing those things pretty well means it going to have to be a hard brexit

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, tebee said:

If you can find a legal way of doing it without NI(at least) staying in the SM and CU. then you have a brilliant career ahead of you as international negotiator  - I suggest you contact TM directly, she could do with some help.

 

The '' There is no agreement until everything is agreed '' is irrelevant, this is enshrined in UK law now, no matter if we leave with an agreement or without one.  

When we leave the SM and CU it is the EU (not the UK gov) that would seek to put in a hard border, I think. So that law is irrelevant - I think?

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Maybe I am dumb. If so explain to me why more Brits are not working in the EU?

The EU is not really a place to be looking for work if you are under 30. Too high a rate of unemployment.

 

Not rocket science ??

[Grouse]

4 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

 

So you agree that membership of the EEA or EFTA is not an option ?

I would negotiate the freedom of movement condition to graduates only and stay on EEA AND SM

[tebee]

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

When we leave the SM and CU it is the EU (not the UK gov) that would seek to put in a hard border, I think. So that law is irrelevant - I think?

Both governments would be bound by WTO rules to enforce a border

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

I would negotiate the freedom of movement condition to graduates only and stay on EEA AND SM

It does not matter what you want to negotiate.

 

According to your beloved EU / Barnier / Juncker / Tusk, freedom of movement is non negotiable.

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

The EU is not really a place to be looking for work if you are under 30. Too high a rate of unemployment.

 

Not rocket science ??

So you contend that not many Brits take up employment in EU countries because of high unemployment rates. For qualified people? Interesting...