UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[tebee]

7 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Owen Paterson, the former secretary of state for Northern Ireland and Defra (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) describes the EU’s hypocrisy on the Irish border as that the EU:

 

“believes the integrity of the single market can be guaranteed with checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, then the same principle can surely be applied to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.”

 

This quote and those below are from today’s Guardian.

 

“Northern Ireland’s sales to the Republic of Ireland account for less than 0.2% of the United Kingdom’s GDP. In order to facilitate that tiny fraction, it would be ridiculous to forgo our ability to reduce tariffs and strike new trade deals around the world, when the IMF predicts that 90% of global economic growth will be outside Europe in the next decade.”

 

“This ignores the fact that there is already a border – for tax, currency, excise and security – that is managed seamlessly with existing technical and administrative procedures. It’s clear that many people have an outdated vision of borders – some still seem to imagine customs posts manned by officers in tricorn hats and knee breeches, lowering striped poles to stop stagecoaches, inspecting barrels of brandy with wooden ladles.

 

Modern borders are tax points, not inspection points. World Trade Organization rules do not require checks at the physical border. The UK inspects 4% of imports, and the Republic of Ireland only 1%. Sanitary and phytosanitary checks – which EU law requires “in the immediate vicinity of the point of entry” – can occur considerable distances from the border. In Rotterdam, for instance, posts are located up to 20km from the docks themselves.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/11/irish-border-fair-brexit-deal-theresa-may

 

But the checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, only apply if both NI and the rest of the UK remain within the EU customs union   They are standards compliance tests not customs checks.

 

It might be a very small percentage, but It's the principal of the thing - now I realize that Brexters don't really do principals and so maybe don't understand this, but other people do have them.  

[nauseus]

28 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Please stop posting facts and common sense on this thread.

 

You know that it confuses and irritates some of the many Remainers.

Sorry, I'll see a specialist.

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

Grouse,

strictly speaking, Cameron was not in need of your authority, he was the boss.

The boss status was given to him by the previous GE.

 

Nah. He was only a prime minister. We don't do presidential decrees. 

 

Certainly he had clout, but parliament IS the boss.

 

I don't think even the Queen can issue a fiat decree...

Edited October 12, 2018 by Grouse

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Well you need to read it again then.

 

1 You're not impartial at all though are you. The hypocrisy is plain as day, but people who wear blinkers rarely see what they don't want to see.

2 Wrong 

3 Wrong

4 So far the Irish state hasn't contributed anything to the discussion.

1 I was rather implying that neither of us are exactly imperial. Sorry yet another sarcasm fail.

2 no you are wrong  - can you name any border where  there are different custom regimes on the two sides and no customs checks - should the UK make the Dover bouder more porous so people can do booze and fag runs more easily post brexit ?  

3 Eu got the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize party as a result of helping broker the GFA. See also this for more details of the Eu's involvement in the process. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/583116/IPOL_BRI(2017)583116_EN.pdf

4 Irish state asked the EU to support the GFA

 

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Sorry, I'll see a specialist.

But he might be an Expert - we all know leavers have an allergy to experts...

[sandyf]

20 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

“This ignores the fact that there is already a border – for tax, currency, excise and security – that is managed seamlessly with existing technical and administrative procedures.

He ignores the fact that is a border between two member states of the European Union, not an external border to the European Union.

Brexiteer thinking, that you can change one circumstance, without impacting on any other circumstances.

[mommysboy]

11 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

If a horse wins a race by a nose, a short head, a head, a length or a furlong - he still wins.

 

That is the rule.

 

Majority was the rule with Brexit.

 

 

Brexit won.

 

Get over the fact that your horse lost - or change horses and stop whining.

 

Old argument. Brexit won but now its about the deal.

 

The majority of people want a close alliance- not a Chequers deal, or no deal. 

 

They want what they were promised by Boris.

[My Thai Life]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

But the checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, only apply if both NI and the rest of the UK remain within the EU customs union   They are standards compliance tests not customs checks.

 

It might be a very small percentage, but It's the principal of the thing - now I realize that Brexters don't really do principals and so maybe don't understand this, but other people do have them.  

If the EU is happy to accept (actully recommends) the principal principle of setting  customs-related checks away from a border, then it's hypocritical not to accept that principle in reverse. As you are a man who is so committed to principles apparently, I'm sure you will agree.

 

Owen Patterson, as the former secretary of state for Northern Ireland and Defra (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) is a leading expert on these Irish issues (obviously much more than Barnier or Ivan Rogers) and I know remainers love experts (when it suits them). Let me quote the relevant part of his article to prevent further distortion:

 

 

"Even the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, is “convinced that it is possible to carry out the kind of checks we need without creating a physical frontier”. Under his unacceptable proposals, there would be extensive controls between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. But if he believes the integrity of the single market can be guaranteed with checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, then the same principle can surely be applied to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

As well as being a clear breach of the Good Friday agreement’s principle of consent, Barnier’s proposals are not in Northern Ireland’s economic interests. Less than 5% of Northern Ireland sales are with the Republic of Ireland, compared to 20% with Britain."

 

 

 

 

[mommysboy]

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Nobody in their right mind thought it would be easy.

 

IMHO however the crew that is running it from the UK side (as my teachers used to say), could do better and must try harder.

 

The crew from the other side (EU) could have made it easier but again, IMHO, they are firing warning shots across all the other countries and warning them that the EU will make it as hard or harder for them should they want to exit.

 

There seem to be a few minor rebellions that the EU is trying to stamp down such as Poland and its judges, Italy not playing the monetary game nicely, Austria and Hungary refusing to accept the quota for immigrants.

 

I think that the EU commission is starting to fear a loss of control and for their jobs.

 

This is only MY opinion. YMMV.

'Nobody in their right mind thought it would be easy.'

 

Bill, Boris said it would be easy.

 

People are just asking for what they voted for- the present deal falls way short of that anticipated at the time of the vote.

 

Nobody wants to invest in a bad deal.  Everyone complains when they buy something and then get something less.

[Grouse]

7 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

Old argument. Brexit won but now its about the deal.

 

The majority of people want a close alliance- not a Chequers deal, or no deal. 

 

They want what they were promised by Boris.

I think you'll find that horses whinny they don't really whine.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

+ UK new car sales are all down.

+ October is generally a poor month after the September new registrations.

+ Diesel is out of favour as a fuel due to recent concerns about PM (Particulate Matter) emissions over Co2.

+ VW's "Dieselgate" affair has scared a lot of oil burning vehicle buyers away. 

+ The new ULEZ (Ultra Low Emissions Zone) in London is very costly if your vehicle does not comply with regulations and you need to get in to that area regularly and a high % of JLR owners live in the more affluent SE and London. 

 

 

Yes, I understand that diesel is not popular at the moment, I just don't get how that is being equated with the 3 day week making Jags considering that the vast majority of them are petrol.

 

[My Thai Life]

The Irish border "issue" is a hot topic again this week, and not just on this forum. I’ve posted one of these two links before. They might be of interest to people who are more interested in solutions rather than point-scoring.

 

“Norway, which is not a member of the European Union, has a thousand-mile frontier with Sweden, the EU's longest land border. The Norwegians are part of the European Economic Area, meaning they enjoy tariff-free trade, but they still have to mount customs checks at the borders.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41412561

 

 

Swedish expert offers post-Brexit Irish border solution.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43473807

 

 

 

[sandyf]

21 minutes ago, tebee said:

2 no you are wrong  - can you name any border where  there are different custom regimes on the two sides and no customs checks - should the UK make the Dover border more porous so people can do booze and fag runs more easily post brexit ?  

Quite, borders between the EU and Switzerland are probably the closest scenario and what do their crossing points look like.

 

It is time that some faced the fact that there are only really 2 alternatives, SM or reunification, and it would appear TM is chasing the latter.

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

OK I am strongly remain - but if Brexit is the will of the people and if we can find a sensible way of doing it I would (reluctantly) accept it. Would not stop me thinking it is wrong though !

 

What I am completly opposed to is the currrent clustfuck which is most certainly not what people voted for and those elements that seem determined to force it through  no matter what the collateral damage.

 

I see remain as the best way of avoiding the chaos, so I  double down on my support for that now,  but my main worry is the  chaos this will result from a disorganized Brexit.

'but if Brexit is the will of the people and if we can find a sensible way of doing it I would (reluctantly) accept it. Would not stop me thinking it is wrong though !'

 

Yes, wise words.  It's simply about not wanting a total shambles and proceeding in a way that is least damaging.  What we have is totally unacceptable, and the majority of the electorate don't want it.

 

Every transaction we make in the outside world is subject to a reality check- and that's when we ask those very basic questions encapsulated by the expression 'horse sense'.

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

If the EU is happy to accept (actully recommends) the principal principle of setting  customs-related checks away from a border, then it's hypocritical not to accept that principle in reverse. As you are a man who is so committed to principles apparently, I'm sure you will agree.

 

Owen Patterson, as the former secretary of state for Northern Ireland and Defra (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) is a leading expert on these Irish issues (obviously much more than Barnier or Ivan Rogers) and I know remainers love experts (when it suits them). Let me quote the relevant part of his article to prevent further distortion:

 

 

"Even the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, is “convinced that it is possible to carry out the kind of checks we need without creating a physical frontier”. Under his unacceptable proposals, there would be extensive controls between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. But if he believes the integrity of the single market can be guaranteed with checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, then the same principle can surely be applied to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

As well as being a clear breach of the Good Friday agreement’s principle of consent, Barnier’s proposals are not in Northern Ireland’s economic interests. Less than 5% of Northern Ireland sales are with the Republic of Ireland, compared to 20% with Britain."

 

 

 

 

The checks away from the border thing is from TM's post checkers proposal not Barniers I think you will find . As I said above these are standards compliance checks for single market purposes, not customs checks for duty etc - different things 

 

UK would also be in breach of GFA - which is incidentally  now part of the UKs nebulous constitution - the problem being that the institution on the NI side that is supposed to ratify changes does not currently exist.  

 

Oh and you'll have to put up with the occasional misspelling from me - I'm dyslexic.

[mommysboy]

27 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

If the EU is happy to accept (actully recommends) the principal principle of setting  customs-related checks away from a border, then it's hypocritical not to accept that principle in reverse. As you are a man who is so committed to principles apparently, I'm sure you will agree.

 

Owen Patterson, as the former secretary of state for Northern Ireland and Defra (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) is a leading expert on these Irish issues (obviously much more than Barnier or Ivan Rogers) and I know remainers love experts (when it suits them). Let me quote the relevant part of his article to prevent further distortion:

 

 

"Even the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, is “convinced that it is possible to carry out the kind of checks we need without creating a physical frontier”. Under his unacceptable proposals, there would be extensive controls between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. But if he believes the integrity of the single market can be guaranteed with checks set back from the British/Northern Ireland border, then the same principle can surely be applied to the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

As well as being a clear breach of the Good Friday agreement’s principle of consent, Barnier’s proposals are not in Northern Ireland’s economic interests. Less than 5% of Northern Ireland sales are with the Republic of Ireland, compared to 20% with Britain."

 

 

 

 

All this aside, the majority of people simply don't want this Chequer's style plan, and, more salient, it appears that Parliament is somewhat lukewarm. 

 

Hopefully, it's a dead duck.

 

 

[mommysboy]

????

25 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I think you'll find that horses whinny they don't really whine.

Some bluster!????

Edited October 12, 2018 by mommysboy

[My Thai Life]

There is a common misunderstanding that the WTO requires a hard border with Ireland. This “misunderstanding” has been peddled by the EU.

 

Actually the WTO requires borders to be maintained as frictionlessly as possible.

 

“The WTO’s new Trade Facilitation Agreement obliges the EU to maintain borders which are as frictionless as possible, using modern technologies such as pre–arrival processing of documents and electronic payments. Discrimination against foreign products through all sorts of internal regulations is forbidden. These rules are enforced by a well-respected international tribunal which has a high rate of compliance and cannot be overruled by the European Court of Justice.”

 

David Collins, professor of International Economic Law at City, University of London.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/whos-afraid-of-the-wto/

 

[aright]

41 minutes ago, tebee said:

But he might be an Expert - we all know leavers have an allergy to experts...

And we Leavers know why Remainers love Experts. They have more data than judgement.

[kwilco]

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

 

Agree.

 

It takes a seriously biased poster to believe that Wilson and Cameron were dictators ????!

It would take a SERIOUSLY blinkered one not to see the similarities and methodologis employed by fascist governments and those in the UK today.

[tebee]

12 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

If a horse wins a race by a nose, a short head, a head, a length or a furlong - he still wins.

 

That is the rule.

 

Majority was the rule with Brexit.

 

 

Brexit won.

 

Get over the fact that your horse lost - or change horses and stop whining.

 

It doesn't matter if our horse lost, if no one know what to do after the race with the winnings, why continue?

 

 There is a curious paradox of those who believed that the EU had inserted itself into virtually every nook and cranny of the country’s social and economic life, also believing that all these strings could be cut extremely rapidly, and that nothing would go awry for the UK. Despite the obvious fact that the UK’s very immersion in these structures meant its our capacity to resume sovereignty in areas where it had been pooled, was much diminished across large tracts of the economy now regulated supranationally.

Despite the fact that the current operation of the UK economy, both in manufacturing and in services, is heavily predicated on membership of both the Single Market and the Customs Union, and what each had done, however imperfectly, over decades to facilitate trade and investment flows across what used to be hard external borders, now the internal borders of a Common Market.

We live, and have lived for some time, in a comprehensive regulatory union, but despite wanting to leave it, we struggle at political level to understand what that means.

 

The failure of Brexit supporters revolutionaries to think this through when they really needed to, and the determination in 2016 to rule out all other options as early as possible in order to secure  what sort of brexit they wanted, ended up leading  them into a trap of their own making, Invoking Article 50 when they did and in the fashion they did, The EU duly closed the trap door before they realised what transition they were in for.

 

So we are left in a position of powerlessness, with the choice of whatever scraps the EU  choices to throw to us - a bad deal or a worse no deal. We need to realize we have made a mess of this all on our own. 

 

I think we need to start again. 

[Jip99]

24 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

Old argument. Brexit won but now its about the deal.

 

The majority of people want a close alliance- not a Chequers deal, or no deal. 

 

They want what they were promised by Boris.

 

I agree with that, I was simply replying to someone who was didn’t understand that a majority = win.

 

It has been said many times that the final terms will suit no one. That is not strictly true.

 

The extreme right will be disappointed that we are not repatriating Johny foreigner, Boris has set out his expectations - and nobody in Ireland will be happy.

 

I think the Chequers plan is ill-conceived but I would prefer to start with that rather than “no deal”...... but then I was someone who thought that the conservative government (especially under Cameron) and the EU would have had a draft deal broadly sorted out ....... my confidence in both sides was misplaced.

 

Interestingly, speaking to several people who voted remain, they too were surprised that we were starting from scratch in sorting out a deal. More than half of those remainders are disgusted with the position taken by the EU that they would actually change their vote. 

 

For me, I voted to leave the EU and if that means leaving with ‘no deal’, so be it. My preference is for a deal that helps all parties.

 

 

[tebee]

20 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

There is a common misunderstanding that the WTO requires a hard border with Ireland. This “misunderstanding” has been peddled by the EU.

 

Actually the WTO requires borders to be maintained as frictionlessly as possible.

 

“The WTO’s new Trade Facilitation Agreement obliges the EU to maintain borders which are as frictionless as possible, using modern technologies such as pre–arrival processing of documents and electronic payments. Discrimination against foreign products through all sorts of internal regulations is forbidden. These rules are enforced by a well-respected international tribunal which has a high rate of compliance and cannot be overruled by the European Court of Justice.”

 

David Collins, professor of International Economic Law at City, University of London.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/whos-afraid-of-the-wto/

 

 

You are missing an important fact here - this is a non-discrimination clause. You could have no checks on goods coming in through the Irish border, but you would also need no checks on goods coming in through every other border.

[mommysboy]

'It doesn't matter if our horse lost, if no one know what to do after the race with the winnings, why continue?'

 

The fact is Brexiteers have never come up with a cogent plan as to how to secure the trading deal that was a proximate in the vote- right from 'the off'. The thoroughbred promised is in fact a 3 legged donkey!

 

 

[tebee]

15 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

'It doesn't matter if our horse lost, if no one know what to do after the race with the winnings, why continue?'

 

The fact is Brexiteers have never come up with a cogent plan as to how to secure the trading deal that was a proximate in the vote- right from 'the off'. The thoroughbred promised is in fact a 3 legged donkey!

 

 

Brexit advocates believed, bizarrely, that in the one area the EU HAS genuine superpower capabilities - the regulatory and trade domain in which we were central to building via the Single Market project - it will not exercise its superpower muscles when dealing with us as a former member.

Hence the extraordinary – indeed some would say culpable - naïveté we have seen almost daily for 2 years. Faced by a UK which essentially wants all the benefits of unchanged free trade from its EU membership days, with none / few of the obligations, the EU repeatedly says: “that is just never going to be on offer, and you must choose between a Canadian style relationship, which offers you much greater autonomy but much lower access to our market, and a Norwegian type deal which offers far better market access but much less autonomy.” 

It was never going to say anything else. It was always going to put first the integrity of its current legal order and the need to demonstrate a very clear distinction between the benefits available to members, and the best that could ever be on offer to any third country. And, most importantly  it was never going to change its legal order for the benefit of a state that had chosen to leave it.

Edited October 12, 2018 by tebee

[Guest]

The difference between Russian trolls and real information.

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/most-europeans-have-a-negative-attitude-towards-the-eu/

 

""The EU project has failed", says pro-Kremlin media. Don't be deceived. "

 

Twitter account to follow: https://twitter.com/EUvsDisinfo

Edited October 12, 2018 by Guest

[Small Joke]

Quite looking forward to getting a Republic of Scotland passport and all the benefits of EU, like the EU medical card that meant I paid just 22 euros in Portugal for ambulance and ER stay during a false alarm heart condition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[aright]

44 minutes ago, tebee said:

 

It doesn't matter if our horse lost, if no one know what to do after the race with the winnings, why continue?

 

  

I may have escaped your notice they are discussing what to do with the winnings. It's called negotiation.

Don't get upset because they didn't ask your opinion as to what should be on and off the table. It was similar to a three line whip

"Leave the EU"

[dunroaming]

39 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

I agree with that, I was simply replying to someone who was didn’t understand that a majority = win.

 

It has been said many times that the final terms will suit no one. That is not strictly true.

 

The extreme right will be disappointed that we are not repatriating Johny foreigner, Boris has set out his expectations - and nobody in Ireland will be happy.

 

I think the Chequers plan is ill-conceived but I would prefer to start with that rather than “no deal”...... but then I was someone who thought that the conservative government (especially under Cameron) and the EU would have had a draft deal broadly sorted out ....... my confidence in both sides was misplaced.

 

Interestingly, speaking to several people who voted remain, they too were surprised that we were starting from scratch in sorting out a deal. More than half of those remainders are disgusted with the position taken by the EU that they would actually change their vote. 

 

For me, I voted to leave the EU and if that means leaving with ‘no deal’, so be it. My preference is for a deal that helps all parties.

 

 

Good post.  I voted remain and I think that the EU are playing hard ball and making things as difficult as they can.  Not surprising as it is what they said all along.  However changing your vote in hindsight to leave doesn't mean anything.  We are leaving anyway and it is about what deal we end up with.

 

To not have a plan for leaving or indeed any clue of how to go about it was unforgivable.  There were just empty promises made in total ignorance of the reality of Brexit. But then nobody knew just how complex and potentially disastrous it would be.  With that hindsight I doubt that the result would have been the same, but I would say that wouldn't I ????

[dunroaming]

7 minutes ago, aright said:

I may have escaped your notice they are discussing what to do with the winnings. It's called negotiation.

Don't get upset because they didn't ask your opinion as to what should be on and off the table. It was similar to a three line whip

"Leave the EU"

Winnings?  Don't feel too much like winnings to me.