Britain must move in Brexit negotiations, Germany says

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Not really sure about a new referendum. I am afraid it would be just as divisive as the first Brexit vote.

In addition, it will take quite some time to actually organise it (possibly past Brexit date) and what would the question be? It is far from clear what a soft Brexit would be and whether it would even be acceptable to the EU...

 

I'm starting from the viewpoint that a soft brexit isn't  obtainable - certainly not now in the remaining time. Therefore Hard brexit is the only obtainable option.

 

The previous referendum did not give "the will of the people" to a hard Brexit with all the job losses and problems that will entail. People were promised " only a considerable upside" and that it would be easy to obtain terms that would let us prosper post-brexit. Some leavers will try to deny this, but hard, no deal brexit isn't what most people thought they were voting for.

 

So the "the will of the people"  is for something that is not currently available - we need to resolve this conundrum.

 

We either go for no deal, which most people will regret and reject afterwards  or we abandon brexit.

 

But this leaves us with an unresolved  democratic deficit  - either way people haven't got what they voted for.

 

I know a new referendum would be divisive, but at least it would give us final resolution on whether people prefer a Brexit that will leave most of them personally worse off  or to remain part of the EU.

 

 

 

[Grouse]

As this is the biggest decision for the UK since the war and as we are hurtling towards a self imposed deadline, I suggest a long vacation where nothing is done. ?

[whatsupdoc]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

I'm starting from the viewpoint that a soft brexit isn't  obtainable - certainly not now in the remaining time. Therefore Hard brexit is the only obtainable option.

 

The previous referendum did not give "the will of the people" to a hard Brexit with all the job losses and problems that will entail. People were promised " only a considerable upside" and that it would be easy to obtain terms that would let us prosper post-brexit. Some leavers will try to deny this, but hard, no deal brexit isn't what most people thought they were voting for.

 

So the "the will of the people"  is for something that is not currently available - we need to resolve this conundrum.

 

We either go for no deal, which most people will regret and reject afterwards  or we abandon brexit.

 

But this leaves us with an unresolved  democratic deficit  - either way people haven't got what they voted for.

 

I know a new referendum would be divisive, but at least it would give us final resolution on whether people prefer a Brexit that will leave most of them personally worse off  or to remain part of the EU.

 

 

 

In that case just go for hard Brexit. It will show the damage and after that a referendum can be held to rejoin the EU.

That at least, although costly, might heal the divisions in the UK. A divided country doesn't benefit anyone (also not the EU). Hopefully, after rejoining the EU, the UK will also adopt the Euro and Schengen....

[tebee]

14 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

In that case just go for hard Brexit. It will show the damage and after that a referendum can be held to rejoin the EU.

That at least, although costly, might heal the divisions in the UK. A divided country doesn't benefit anyone (also not the EU). Hopefully, after rejoining the EU, the UK will also adopt the Euro and Schengen....

My Vulcan logic agrees with  you on this - it would show people just what we were losing.

 

However my human side disagrees. There would be bad irreversible consequences, jobs would be lost, that will not return, people will suffer - who knows if the EU will even want us back after all the trouble and expense we have caused. We would certainly lose our rebate.

 

So do we need to save people from the consequences of their own actions  ? Or do we that child discover that things on the stove are hot by letting them  get hold of them?  

[mommysboy]

8 hours ago, tebee said:

Yes, but you can't use the referendum for legitimising a hard brexit. It wasn't the only sort of brexit that was on offer then. People were told we could leave without consequences - hard brexit will have consequences.   

 

If you want it to be the will of the people, you need a new referendum with those consequences in plain view.  

 

Otherwise when people find out what a Sh!t ball hard brexit really is they will, quite legitimately reverse it as it wasn't what they voted for. If you really believe in Leave  and want Brexit to stick you need to do this.

That's what I think: hence the third choice was neither.

 

But if it was a choice between the hard or soft, then the former is much better.

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Not really sure about a new referendum. I am afraid it would be just as divisive as the first Brexit vote.

In addition, it will take quite some time to actually organise it (possibly past Brexit date) and what would the question be? It is far from clear what a soft Brexit would be and whether it would even be acceptable to the EU...

 

It wouldn't take that long : soft Brexit is the Norway option and is easy to understand:

 

1. Hard Brexit

2. Soft Brexit (single market option)

3. Neither (stay as we are).

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

I'm starting from the viewpoint that a soft brexit isn't  obtainable - certainly not now in the remaining time. Therefore Hard brexit is the only obtainable option.

 

The previous referendum did not give "the will of the people" to a hard Brexit with all the job losses and problems that will entail. People were promised " only a considerable upside" and that it would be easy to obtain terms that would let us prosper post-brexit. Some leavers will try to deny this, but hard, no deal brexit isn't what most people thought they were voting for.

 

So the "the will of the people"  is for something that is not currently available - we need to resolve this conundrum.

 

We either go for no deal, which most people will regret and reject afterwards  or we abandon brexit.

 

But this leaves us with an unresolved  democratic deficit  - either way people haven't got what they voted for.

 

I know a new referendum would be divisive, but at least it would give us final resolution on whether people prefer a Brexit that will leave most of them personally worse off  or to remain part of the EU.

 

 

 

It would be contentious either way. And, anyway, we had one referendum which produced a certain result, so we can't have another because some people think the result is wrong.  

 

 

[roobaa01]

a plain truth merkel sent her incompetent foreign minister upfront to talk nonsense as maas did many times before nobody is listening to that clown. german coalition approval rating at its lowest cdu/csu party 29 % and spd 18 % they are worried for at stake are roughly 9 % exports that means further job losses in germany combined with merkels failed immigration policy an political explosive conglomerate. most likely the afd party will gain from the failed policy. www.wahlrecht.de

 

wbr

roobaa01

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed. 

 

[tebee]

18 hours ago, mommysboy said:

It would be contentious either way. And, anyway, we had one referendum which produced a certain result, so we can't have another because some people think the result is wrong.  

 

 

But the problem is that the result of that referendum is for something that is not available and never was. How do you deliver the unachievable ?

 

Politicians need to admit that they lied about was was possible - though I don't expect for one minute that will happen. 

 

We are now stuck precisely because there isn't a good way forward - do you think the public will be happy if they are given a Brexit were we leave the EU, but they all end up poorer, many losing their jobs and houses ? 

[sandyf]

On 8/4/2018 at 5:10 PM, tomacht8 said:

The WTO say that ‘Britain was, is and will remain a member of the WTO, but the process of independent integration into a series of WTO commitments will depend to a certain extent on the terms of its exit from the European Union’.

All Members of the WTO must have a schedule of commitments related to the terms of market access for their trading partners. In the case of Britain, the country does not have an independent schedule but as part of the European Union, it has abided by the terms of the common EU schedule. After Brexit the British  will need to have an independent schedule.

 

There will also be negotiations required for Britain to join the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). Again the British are proposing the same terms as they shared as an EU Member state. It’s difficult to say how the negotiations on TRQs and GPA may progress. There is a great deal of good will towards Britain among WTO Members, but keep in mind that WTO delegates are trade negotiators. They may seek additional access beyond what is on offer.

 

The whole thing is not so easy peasy

 

Quite, it is far from a done deal. There is the prickly problem of quotas to be dealt with and there has been underlying hints that countries like Spain and Argentina may use the WTO ratification to exercise leverage on other issues. Not that that is a problem, when it comes to brexit, collateral damage has never been an issue.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-meat-banned-eu-australia-beef-liam-fox-dit-friends-of-the-earth-a8475006.html

[dunroaming]

On ‎8‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 5:41 AM, mommysboy said:

It would be contentious either way. And, anyway, we had one referendum which produced a certain result, so we can't have another because some people think the result is wrong.  

 

 

Definitely not a second referendum.  To have that we would still be p*ssing in the dark.  But when we know the deal (or no deal) that has been agreed then surely the leave voters deserve the chance to see if what they voted for is being delivered.  It is not for the remainers but for the poor sops who were sold a pup!

[nausea]

Boring, you won't know the true positions until the last moment. Like anyone's gonna reveal their hand this early in the game. 

[dunroaming]

22 minutes ago, nausea said:

Boring, you won't know the true positions until the last moment. Like anyone's gonna reveal their hand this early in the game. 

This early in the game ???.  Priceless!

[dick dasterdly]

46 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Definitely not a second referendum.  To have that we would still be p*ssing in the dark.  But when we know the deal (or no deal) that has been agreed then surely the leave voters deserve the chance to see if what they voted for is being delivered.  It is not for the remainers but for the poor sops who were sold a pup!

To look on the 'bright' (?) side - it seems more likely that the uk govt. have realised that the electorate are less than impressed with their efforts to procure a 'leave in name only' deal - and so the uk is headed towards no deal.

 

I suspect that a reasonable deal will be agreed at the last minute, to protect business and political interests on both sides.

[Athens]

The new migrant rute to UK will pass Ireland just walking across the border

[dunroaming]

34 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

To look on the 'bright' (?) side - it seems more likely that the uk govt. have realised that the electorate are less than impressed with their efforts to procure a 'leave in name only' deal - and so the uk is headed towards no deal.

 

I suspect that a reasonable deal will be agreed at the last minute, to protect business and political interests on both sides.

I see it a little differently to that but not by much.  I think that the no deal threat is all that the UK are left with because when trying to get concessions out of the EU all they get is a brick wall.  The problem for the government, as I see it, is that a no deal scenario would cause such uproar and protests as to scupper this government completely.  Are they prepared to take that risk?

 

Also (without banging my usual drum), would the leave voters accept that?   I know that some would jump at it but what about the majority who can see the probable consequences?

Edited August 6, 2018 by dunroaming

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I see it a little differently to that but not by much.  I think that the no deal threat is all that the UK are left with because when trying to get concessions out of the EU all they get is a brick wall.  The problem for the government, as I see it, is that a no deal scenario would cause such uproar and protests as to scupper this government completely.  Are they prepared to take that risk?

Basic EU principles were said even before the Brexit. UK does have choices to select, but time is seriously running out. 

 

Aren't those in power right now rather old people, who can choose retirement after this stint running the country? It's hard to see May doing anything after her reputation will eventually be ruined by Brexit anyway.

[dunroaming]

4 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Basic EU principles were said even before the Brexit. UK does have choices to select, but time is seriously running out. 

 

Aren't those in power right now rather old people, who can choose retirement after this stint running the country? It's hard to see May doing anything after her reputation will eventually be ruined by Brexit anyway.

Rather old ?.  Well I suspect May will spend more time walking in the Welsh hills in between making voodoo dolls of Johnson, JRM, David Davis and Liam Fox!

 

It will be interesting to see if she makes the honours list.

[3NUMBAS]

german factory  orders slump

who needs to move ?barnier more likely

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/aug/06/german-factory-orders-slump-trade-war-intensifies-business-live

[3NUMBAS]

JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon has warned Italy's populist government of the likely "catastrophic" consequences that would come from attempts to pull the country out of the eurozone.

Speaking to Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Dimon said that because of the structure of the European Monetary Union — the formal name for the project to converge monetary policy of the eurozone — pulling out would not only be immensely difficult, but also immensely dangerous for the stability of the global financial system.

"Because of the way it has been designed, the European Monetary Union would be hard to reverse without causing catastrophic events," Dimon told the paper.

"This does not mean that Europe should not fix itself; there are many regulatory issues that remain to be solved, and the fact that Brexit happened should make the dialogue between European countries easier."

Dimon's comments come as Italy's populist coalition government, comprised of the Lega Nord and Five Star Movement, repeatedly publicly mentioning pulling out of the euro in the lead up to the creation of that government.

[welovesundaysatspace]

5 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

german factory  orders slump

who needs to move ?barnier more likely

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/aug/06/german-factory-orders-slump-trade-war-intensifies-business-live

Barnier needs to move because German factories had a bad month?

 

[melvinmelvin]

On 7/25/2018 at 5:47 AM, SupermarineS6B said:

Ha ha....... short memory lads ?  The last time Germany told us what to do we bombed them flat......... What a bunch of shysters the EU is revealling itself to be...... or should i say Germany,  because we all know who's really in charge......

what people can bring themselves to say

 

guess EU would be delighted to get rid of persons like you

 

 

[Kwasaki]

12 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

what people can bring themselves to say

 

guess EU would be delighted to get rid of persons like you

Points of view you don't like but what of EU at the mo ?

Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, Austria all have problems whats good about that, independents has to be better than a dictator run club like that.

[SupermarineS6B]

3 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

what people can bring themselves to say

 

guess EU would be delighted to get rid of persons like you

 

 

Myself and 17.4 million others will be glad when the EU is just a distant bad memory, and as for what i said, tell me if i'm wrong...... Germany under Merkel is in charge of Europe, hardly France or the other blood suckers........ a blind man on a galloping horse can see that.......

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Points of view you don't like but what of EU at the mo ?

Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, Austria all have problems whats good about that, independents has to be better than a dictator run club like that.

But you miss the crucial point; yes they all have right wing parties but there is no chance of them gaining actual power. This is the beauty of coalition government. And, euroscepticism is clearly on the decline, even in Italy. Immigration being the single policy of right wingers.

 

The Union WILL morph into an onion (a comment which was mocked before) But I do see a solid core with the Euro and outer shells with varying levels of membership.

Edited September 2, 2018 by Grouse

[nauseus]

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

But you miss the crucial point; yes they all have right wing parties but there is no chance of them gaining actual power. This is the beauty of coalition government. Final, euroscepticism is clearly on the decline, even in Italy.

 

The Union WILL morph into an onion (a comment which was mocked before) But I do see a solid core with the Euro and outer shells with varying levels of membership.

So the new Austrian and Italian governments are not actually in power? The EU has been morphing into the EO for ages: the core was always rotten, then the skin flaked off and now the outer layers are splitting open.

 

 

[roobaa01]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

So the new Austrian and Italian governments are not actually in power? The EU has been morphing into the EO for ages: the core was always rotten, then the skin flaked off and now the outer layers are splitting open.

 

 

in italy patriot dr.salvini's lega nord receives public approval in recent polls 30 %, in sweden the swedish democrats 22 % , germany afd 17 % as it stands right wingers on the rise well socialism is for losers. wbr roobaa01

[Grouse]

13 hours ago, roobaa01 said:

in italy patriot dr.salvini's lega nord receives public approval in recent polls 30 %, in sweden the swedish democrats 22 % , germany afd 17 % as it stands right wingers on the rise well socialism is for losers. wbr roobaa01

Correct.

 

But all these right wing parties are essentially one policy anti-immigration. They do not like EU immigration policies but NONE of them will actually leave the EU. Anti EU feelings have actually retreated.

[bristolboy]

13 hours ago, roobaa01 said:

in italy patriot dr.salvini's lega nord receives public approval in recent polls 30 %, in sweden the swedish democrats 22 % , germany afd 17 % as it stands right wingers on the rise well socialism is for losers. wbr roobaa01

You're wrong about the socialism aspect. While those movement may be right wing on some social issues they are not anti-socialist economically. In some cases, quite the contrary.