UK to warn public every week over 'no-deal Brexit': The Times

[bkkcanuck8]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Funny, I don't remember these multiple choice exit polls at all.

Unfortunately, I cannot find it - it may have been exit polls or it was a poll done very soon after.  Even on here there is a large portion of brexiters who want it and want it now - just a hard exit.  There is however a very large number of those on here who claim to be brexiters -- that keep on selling on the fact that they can basically maintain the same trading arrangement as before but without free movement etc.  (picking and choosing).   I made the comment before that if you were truly looking to exit you would trigger Article 50 and go back to WTO rules like the rest of the world but there is considerable push back on that.   If all the 52% that voted for brexit voted for hard exit... what is taking so long?  When I said Article 50 should be triggered very soon after - there was tremendous pushback ... no no no... there is no rush.  So, if it is just plain brexit... bloody well just leave and let the EU get on with reworking the union and stop playing around.

[bkkcanuck8]

As far as I can tell.  The UK (generally) wanted "out of the EU" because:

  - They would get all that money (gross) with no loss of taxes due to economic adjustments and it would go to the NHS and/or schools.

  - They were afraid of the Turks... they were joining the EU and were going to flood in (funny thing is that Turkey will not be allowed to join during my lifetime so it was just scaremongering use of racism).  

  - They would not be subject to the EU courts

  - They would have control over their borders and free movement of people would be out.

  - But for some reason they would have all the "good bits" of the EU - all the same trading arrangements, services (financial) even though they don't allow labour mobility -- which is just another service.

  - The UK would still have full access to the common market.  

 

They would be able to get a Canada Plus Plus Plus deal which would give them everything they wanted.  

 

Basically, the UK wants out but in at the same time.  The world does not work like that, you don't dictate your arrangement - it is negotiated and for everything you take off the table the other side takes off the table.  If the UK really wants out they will end up at best with a CETA style agreement... and certain industries will have to adjust.   It is not that the EU is out to punish you, it is just the way it is.  A deal like that would be fairly easily achievable, but the UK keeps on trying to sit on the fence.  It is time for the UK to get off the fence.

[kwilco]

Scaremongering or just reasoned argument, call it what you like there seems to be a lot of very well informed bodies concerned about the ramifications of Brexit.

Now it's thetime NFU.

The extremrmy powerful, National Union of Farmers.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/07/uk-run-out-of-food-no-deal-brexit-national-farmers-union?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

 

"The UK farming sector has the potential to be one of the most impacted sectors from a bad Brexit – a frictionless free trade deal with the EU and access to a reliable and competent workforce for farm businesses is critical to the future of the sector,” 

Edited August 7, 2018 by kwilco

[tebee]

Europe really doesn't need us as much as we need them
The public views the EU/UK battle as one of two equal powers but, as painful as it might be for us to accept, it is not.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/europe-really-doesnt-need-us-as-much-as-we-need-them-11462776

 

[Grouse]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cswjf9

 

Hard talk episode is sobering 

[tebee]

58 minutes ago, Grouse said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cswjf9

 

Hard talk episode is sobering 

She tells it like it is....

[melvinmelvin]

 

The terrible chap that carried out the interview, does he always have to interrupt people?

[bkkcanuck8]

12 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

The terrible chap that carried out the interview, does he always have to interrupt people?

Have you never watched or heard Hard Talk before?  Hard questions, and no dillydallying allowed.  There is a limited amount of time available for the interview and politicians often play for time by first answering questions not asked and second giving long-winded answers to questions.  Personally, I wish more interviewers were tougher - but so many just sit there throwing softballs - or not asking tough questions of their politically favoured side (which means the politicians just pick the interviewers based on being in agreement with them).  It has been the downfall of news.  Too many snowflake politicians out there now.

[melvinmelvin]

1 minute ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

Have you never watched or heard Hard Talk before?  Hard questions, and no dillydallying allowed.  There is a limited amount of time available for the interview and politicians often play for time by first answering questions not asked and second giving long-winded answers to questions.  Personally, I wish more interviewers were tougher - but so many just sit there throwing softballs - or not asking tough questions of their politically favoured side (which means the politicians just pick the interviewers based on being in agreement with them).  It has been the downfall of news.  Too many snowflake politicians out there now.

 

He had 23 minutes, a knowledgeable interviewee, plenty of time, no reason to be rude.

 

[Laughing Gravy]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

He had 23 minutes, a knowledgeable interviewee, plenty of time, no reason to be rude.

 

That’s the biased BBC for you. Same on Question Time shouting down people with different opinions to the remain. They should have the licence fee taken away nd fund themselves like everyone else especially as they have be n found to have complete  biase on BREXIT.

[melvinmelvin]

5 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

That’s the biased BBC for you. Same on Question Time shouting down people with different opinions to the remain. They should have the licence fee taken away nd fund themselves like everyone else especially as they have be n found to have complete  biase on BREXIT.

 

5 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

That’s the biased BBC for you. Same on Question Time shouting down people with different opinions to the remain. They should have the licence fee taken away nd fund themselves like everyone else especially as they have be n found to have complete  biase on BREXIT.

 

funny you mention licence fee and take away

 

having a national broadcaster like BBC has a very very strong political foundation in lots of European countries

kinda weird - but that is how European politicians are ( and YES - this has nothing to do with EU or as brexiteers say; fascist Merkel )

 

[aright]

4 hours ago, Grouse said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cswjf9

 

Hard talk episode is sobering 

I found it more fearful than sobering but then I wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Barnier team.

It's a bit rich talking about Treaties and the Rule of Law when the EU bails out countries in financial difficulties, Germany pays  Russia to build a pipeline to serve its own energy needs then negotiates a preferential energy price denied to other member states...…...all against EU Law.

Denying the truth doesn't change the facts.

 

 

[whatsupdoc]

6 minutes ago, aright said:

I found it more fearful than sobering but then I wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Barnier team.

It's a bit rich talking about Treaties and the Rule of Law when the EU bails out countries in financial difficulties, Germany pays  Russia to build a pipeline to serve its own energy needs then negotiates a preferential energy price denied to other member states...…...all against EU Law.

Denying the truth doesn't change the facts.

 

 

Bending the law a bit for member countries can be OK, but bending it a lot for a (soon to be) third country?? Don't think so.

[aright]

I'm not asking them to bend the law just pointing out the hypocrisy of citing Treaties and Law, as a reason for no concessions, something they feel does not apply to themselves. While I still feel there is a possibility of an eleventh hour deal at the behest of the EU' I wont be too upset if we walk away from the table. The EU's stance on Brexit has always been an "in with everything" or an "out with nothing" approach …….more a position of we don't want to negotiate than lets negotiate.

 

I also have a sneaky feeling in the event of no deal the countries with the poorer economies, who cannot afford to loose their market share, Spain, Italy, Ireland will trade with us on a zero tariff basis regardless of what the EU says. Its only a feeling but were it to happen that is a major headache for the EU.   

[vogie]

41 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Bending the law a bit for member countries can be OK, but bending it a lot for a (soon to be) third country?? Don't think so.

Both the UK and the EU are set to lose, yes your precious EU will lose too. But most folk in the UK are sick to death of the EUs intransigence and some of its members poor attempt to goad the UK, if we have to walk away so be it, you have been warned also.

[melvinmelvin]

20 minutes ago, aright said:

I'm not asking them to bend the law just pointing out the hypocrisy of citing Treaties and Law, as a reason for no concessions, something they feel does not apply to themselves. While I still feel there is a possibility of an eleventh hour deal at the behest of the EU' I wont be too upset if we walk away from the table. The EU's stance on Brexit has always been an "in with everything" or an "out with nothing" approach …….more a position of we don't want to negotiate than lets negotiate.

 

I also have a sneaky feeling in the event of no deal the countries with the poorer economies, who cannot afford to loose their market share, Spain, Italy, Ireland will trade with us on a zero tariff basis regardless of what the EU says. Its only a feeling but were it to happen that is a major headache for the EU.   

 

This I disagree with.

 

11th hour deal might easily happen, it often goes that way - when pressed.

 

I disagree with your in-everything/out everything-bit.

Even braindead UK citizens should be able to understand that you cannot split the 4 freedoms,

enjoy single/inner market - enjoy customs union - not enjoy free flow of people.

 

EU is what it is, they ain't gonna redesign it for the benefit of blowjob retro-mug pmtm and other daft UKers.

 

[aright]

2 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

This I disagree with.

 

11th hour deal might easily happen, it often goes that way - when pressed.

 

I disagree with your in-everything/out everything-bit.

Even braindead UK citizens should be able to understand that you cannot split the 4 freedoms,

enjoy single/inner market - enjoy customs union - not enjoy free flow of people.

 

EU is what it is, they ain't gonna redesign it for the benefit of blowjob retro-mug pmtm and other daft UKers.

 

What you say and what I said is not inconsistent.

I agree  the EU is not prepared to split the four freedoms  but the consequences of that position results in an "in with everything" or an "out with nothing" negotiating stance. 

[welovesundaysatspace]

6 minutes ago, aright said:

 "in with everything" or an "out with nothing" negotiating stance. 

If “everything” refers to the four freedoms then you’re right. But that’s something everyone was aware of in the first place, not a big surprise here. Whatever the U.K. was aiming for — they knew that the four freedom would not be negotiable. 

[aright]

and?     so?

Edited August 8, 2018 by aright

[whatsupdoc]

27 minutes ago, vogie said:

Both the UK and the EU are set to lose, yes your precious EU will lose too. But most folk in the UK are sick to death of the EUs intransigence and some of its members poor attempt to goad the UK, if we have to walk away so be it, you have been warned also.

The EU made it very clear right from the beginning that the 4 freedoms cannot be divided. Yet that is what the UK has been trying to do all the time.

The EU would be more than happy to negotiate the Norway or Canada options but due to "Red Lines" of the UK this doesn't happen. I am actually sick of the intransigence of the UK in this matter.

The integrity of the single market is more important than the trade deal with the UK, so walk away if you like.

 

I guess the EU and UK will still work out something about security cooperation, aviation, rights of expats etcetera even in the absence of a trade (or even withdrawal) agreement.

But if the UK wants to stick to its red lines it should negotiate on an attainable trade deal, not try to get a cherrypicking deal that is a priori unacceptable for the EU.

[melvinmelvin]

26 minutes ago, aright said:

What you say and what I said is not inconsistent.

I agree  the EU is not prepared to split the four freedoms  but the consequences of that position results in an "in with everything" or an "out with nothing" negotiating stance. 

 

dunno aright,

but why hasn't UK started making her WTO/OMC service profile/schedule so  that she can trade when EU is history

 

why has not police coop been approached

why has not spook coop been approached

airline traffic?

maritime traffic in the Channel

UK's continued participation in EU research efforts

space navigation systems

military coop

cross EU transport of goods

simple thing as driving tickets

nuclear coop

 

and a whole fuckin host of other issues

Whats the UK government doing?

Waiting for the EU to serve them everything on a dish during the last hours?

 

 

 

[vogie]

7 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

The EU made it very clear right from the beginning that the 4 freedoms cannot be divided. Yet that is what the UK has been trying to do all the time.

The EU would be more than happy to negotiate the Norway or Canada options but due to "Red Lines" of the UK this doesn't happen. I am actually sick of the intransigence of the UK in this matter.

The integrity of the single market is more important than the trade deal with the UK, so walk away if you like.

 

I guess the EU and UK will still work out something about security cooperation, aviation, rights of expats etcetera even in the absence of a trade (or even withdrawal) agreement.

But if the UK wants to stick to its red lines it should negotiate on an attainable trade deal, not try to get a cherrypicking deal that is a priori unacceptable for the EU.

Well it seems obvious by your post that the EU is not going to shift and the UK is not to move as well. Looks like we'll be walking.

[whatsupdoc]

6 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

dunno aright,

but why hasn't UK started making her WTO/OMC service profile/schedule so  that she can trade when EU is history

 

why has not police coop been approached

why has not spook coop been approached

airline traffic?

maritime traffic in the Channel

UK's continued participation in EU research efforts

space navigation systems

military coop

cross EU transport of goods

simple thing as driving tickets

nuclear coop

 

and a whole fuckin host of other issues

Whats the UK government doing?

Waiting for the EU to serve them everything on a dish during the last hours?

 

 

 

It might well be that a lot of the things you mention have been agreed upon by Michael Barnier and Olly Robbins (so out of the spotlights). Barnier said the negotiations were 80% complete.....

But the future trade arrangement and not to forget the Irish border problem are still very far from being agreed upon.

[aright]

MM

I cant answer for the Government only myself but the question needs to be asked, as many on the leave side of the argument pointed out at the time. If after Cameron's appeal for reform EU leaders weren't prepared to offer any concessions, when the UK was on the brink of voting to leave, why would they do it now?

 

[melvinmelvin]

 

To the above comment.

Forget that bit about Norway option, it is not within EUs remit.

It is first an foremost and issue for EFTA.

 

Canada - OK Switzerland  OK

EFTA not OK, not EUs business.

 

[whatsupdoc]

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

To the above comment.

Forget that bit about Norway option, it is not within EUs remit.

It is first an foremost and issue for EFTA.

 

Canada - OK Switzerland  OK

EFTA not OK, not EUs business.

 

Norway is an option though (even if the EU cannot negotiate it), but the UK doesn't want it because of their red lines.

Switzerland is something that the EU would be very reluctant to do again, not a real option.

That leaves Canada then (perhaps after a "Blind Brexit").

 

[dunroaming]

19 hours ago, aright said:

As for the real fear being if we leave the EU , our planes would be grounded, mass shortages of food, no pharmaceuticals , civil disorder and unprecedented violence.....stuff and nonsense.

I agree or I think I agree.  None of us know what will happen until it happens but until than it is all hype.

 

As I have said before the hype is there generated mainly by media to make the days headlines.  The latest from the police 

 

"In a leaked letter the organisation representing police and crime commissioners urged Sajid Javid, the home secretary, to draft urgent contingency plans for a hard Brexit."

 

Should we be panicking over this latest "leaked letter"?  Probably not because once again it is speculation.  In the same vein we shouldn't take any notice of other "statements". 

 

Liam Fox said (before and after the referendum) that negotiating a trade deal with the EU would be "one of the easiest in human history".  A couple of days ago he said there was a 60% chance of it now being a no deal Brexit.  And yes he is still "trade secretary".

 

We are constantly being fed rhetoric and no facts!

 

Obviously I have a different interpretation to yours and think on balance that we will be considerably worse off with any Brexit, hard or soft.  But that is not the point at the moment.  it is the way we are being treated by the people who are supposedly representing our interests.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, aright said:

I found it more fearful than sobering but then I wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Barnier team.

It's a bit rich talking about Treaties and the Rule of Law when the EU bails out countries in financial difficulties, Germany pays  Russia to build a pipeline to serve its own energy needs then negotiates a preferential energy price denied to other member states...…...all against EU Law.

Denying the truth doesn't change the facts.

 

 

Thanks for listening

 

Message I got was EU does not wish to risk damaging the SM and CU. They see this as essential for cohesion. They will be flexible on everything but will not risk undermining their foundations even if they suffer significant economic harm in the short term. Time to take that on board; there is no bluff.

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

If “everything” refers to the four freedoms then you’re right. But that’s something everyone was aware of in the first place, not a big surprise here. Whatever the U.K. was aiming for — they knew that the four freedom would not be negotiable. 

The problematic pillar is free movement of people. There are already legal throttles already available and further brakes could be negotiated.

 

We should remain and force through change from a position of strength.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

dunno aright,

but why hasn't UK started making her WTO/OMC service profile/schedule so  that she can trade when EU is history

 

why has not police coop been approached

why has not spook coop been approached

airline traffic?

maritime traffic in the Channel

UK's continued participation in EU research efforts

space navigation systems

military coop

cross EU transport of goods

simple thing as driving tickets

nuclear coop

 

and a whole fuckin host of other issues

Whats the UK government doing?

Waiting for the EU to serve them everything on a dish during the last hours?

 

 

 

They're on their hols in Great Yarmouth!