(18-11-2018 16:11 )Jack the Nipper Wrote: [ -> ]...When in fact the concept of a UK becoming an independent country that isn't bound by EU laws & EU legislation where UK laws are often overridden by EU laws. A country that can set it's own immigration,environment & trade policies is a perfectly reasonable notion...
Theresa May duping both Leave supporting MP's & supporters by setting red-lines on her negotiations capitulated on those lines just to push a shoddy,half-baked Withdrawal Deal in a sort of back this or not have Brexit ultimatum/blackmail....
I've read extracts of the 585 Withdrawal Deal (more than Corbyn it seems) & it clearly states that in the Backstop Agreement the whole of UK will be locked in the Customs Union that we can only ever leave if the whole of the EU allow us to...
I am curious ...
What sort of laws of the land do you wish to change?
What sort of immigration, environment & trade policies do you want for this country?
What sort of Withdrawal Deal do you want and what, if anything, are you prepared to compromise in order to get it?
What would you propose as a backstop, if anything, for the Northern Ireland conundrum?
What is your conclusion for how you personally, let alone me, will be better off once we are outside the EU at the end of any transitional period?
I'm sorry if there's a lot of rangy questions there but I have heard and read a lot of rhetoric on this thread, on HYS comment sections, in RL and elsewhere on this subject but precious few answers to those sorts of questions from someone of your obvious intelligence and considered viewpoint. You seem the sort of thinking leaver that might help me understand such a vision for our future and why you think the outlined proposal from May doesn't do it justice.
^^
We need to build a wall
For all those criticising Theresa May, I doubt that any of the Brexiteers would have got much more out of the EU. Ever since the vote the EU have made things as difficult as possible in the negotiations due to them knowing that Labour, Lib Dems, SNP etc wouldn't have allowed the British people a vote on whether they wanted to stay in the EU or not and have been very pro staying in the EU and stopping Brexit plus the EU wanted to scare any other country thinking of leaving the club. The EU have been able to stand back and allow those opposition parties plus the Labour/Lib Dem majority in the House of Lords to slow down the process and try to reverse the decision of the British people in the referendum. Since May gambled on a snap General Election and lost her majority in the House of Commons the EU's position has been strengthened further. After David Davis resigned as Brexit Secretary I have been waiting for their different plan/strategy to be put forward. I'm still waiting! The EU want us to stay in and they hope that the House of Commons voting down this deal will allow this to happen as our leaving puts depending on who you believe an £8-10 Billion pound a year hole in the EU budget
(18-11-2018 17:59 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]I am curious ...
What sort of laws of the land do you wish to change?
What sort of immigration, environment & trade policies do you want for this country?
What sort of Withdrawal Deal do you want and what, if anything, are you prepared to compromise in order to get it?
What would you propose as a backstop, if anything, for the Northern Ireland conundrum?
What is your conclusion for how you personally, let alone me, will be better off once we are outside the EU at the end of any transitional period?
I'm sorry if there's a lot of rangy questions there but I have heard and read a lot of rhetoric on this thread, on HYS comment sections, in RL and elsewhere on this subject but precious few answers to those sorts of questions from someone of your obvious intelligence and considered viewpoint. You seem the sort of thinking leaver that might help me understand such a vision for our future and why you think the outlined proposal from May doesn't do it justice.
One man's curiosity is another man's form of sarcasm & judging by your numerous questions that even the most in-depth,knowledgeable EU expert would struggle to answer without a forensic research on every EU/UK law,trade,immigration & environmental policy etc I'm opting for the latter.If I had every answer to each of those without researching them first then I'd probably be a Government mandarin & not exchanging dialect on a forum.And if you too are unconversant with every machination of EU/UK then we are both talking hypothetically of what we both want inside or outside the EU.
Briefly touching over a things on a few subjects regarding immigration (7 out of 10 voters back controls on immigration) I'd back an end of freedom of movement in exchange for a tier/skills based visa system (time limited for certain sectors if there are labour shortages).More Government investment on apprenticeships (for both school leavers & adults) & work experience placements in school with better careers advice.Less focus on governments trying to push every school leaver into university (& pointless courses).
Withdrawal Deal/Backstop;The EU has offered 2 off the shelf models Norway & Canada Deal & from day dot I've always advocated for a Canada Plus model where EU negotiator Michel Barnier has admitted he is open for an Invisible Border between both Ireland's if sufficient technology is there(like there currently is with a technological one for differentiating VAT, currency etc).If full technology isn't available then I'd float the Nick Boles' idea of temporarily moving into a Norway Deal then transition into a Canada Plus model when technology is ready.And remember the backstop plan is there if a failure to negotiate a trade-deal.The main fault with Theresa May's backstop plan is that there is no end date & the only way the leave it is via a mutual agreement.And as I've mentioned previously 7 pages of the Withdrawal Agreement stipulates that any future trade deal with the EU requires us being in the Customs Union that would nulify the UK from trading independently around the world.
Cutting to the quick though neither you nor I will change each others minds or our reasons for voting so it's a futile debate.But as a leave voter I have a few questions for you (as a remainer)that I have prepared for you that aren't quite as technical as mine.
Do you back a People's Vote/2nd Ref & if so what question should be on the ballot paper (referendum questions in nature have 2 binary answers)?.
Should the remain vote win on a 2nd Ref what compromises (or elements of leave) could be made that would satisfy leave voters & unite the country?.
Should the leave vote win again on a 2nd Ref would it mean a Hard Brexit or would negotiations need to be made & for what?.
Under what circumstances should a Hard Border between both Ireland's be implemented & by whom?.
Regarding immigration rules who should get immigration preference an Indian Doctor or an EU fruit picker?.
7 out of 10 people believe the immigration in the UK needs to be controlled or reduced are they right? if no then do immigration levels have any impact on wages & infrastructure?.
(19-11-2018 02:58 )Jack the Nipper Wrote: [ -> ]... questions that even the most in-depth,knowledgeable EU expert would struggle to answer without a forensic research on every EU/UK law,trade,immigration & environmental policy etc I'm opting for the latter.If I had every answer to each of those without researching them first then I'd probably be a Government mandarin & not exchanging dialect on a forum...
This is partly why I thought the first referendum was a bad idea to begin with.
It was clear that the whole concept of withdrawal was riddled with nuance and complexity. Most people don't have the time, the resource or the background needed to understand enough about this stuff to make an informed judgement. That's the inherent flaw with most referendums.
The campaigns then compounded the problem by burying the country in prodigious amounts of bullshit. 'Project Fear' malarkey from one side, and 'Project It'll be Alright on the Night' from the other.
There were so many lies told by everyone that -- however well-informed we convinced ourselves that we were -- we were actually just wandering in a fog and voting on the basis of how much we liked or disliked Boris Johnson and David Cameron.
We elect Members of Parliament to be our representatives; to do the 'forensic research' for us and then to vote their conscience on our behalf. The Tories couldn't do that -- they couldn't resolve the tension in their own party, so they passed the buck to 'the people' and then presided over the most mendacious campaign ever seen outside of Trumpland.
(The frustration, by the way, is directed at both the Leave and Remain campaigns - a pox on both their houses)
I certainly agree that on the EU Referendum in 2016 without setting out concrete plans on all eventualities whether leave or vote won created the terrible political vacuum & disillusionment in public we have now.The truth is MP's & just about everyone else in the political circle were so cocksure that a Remain vote would win they didn't feel the need to prepare otherwise.When political cowards Cameron & Osborne tucked tail & ran (neither should be allowed back into politics again) instead of dealing with a problems they caused head on.And the question will always remain that if a genuine Brexiteer (Davis,Raab,Leadsome to name a few) instead a staunch remainer in Theresa May negotiated things how different would the Withdrawal Agreement look,I would like to think very different to a more in than out Agreement now on the table.
But for all the mess the Government has made of Brexit Labour shouldn't get away scot-free with their Utopian vision of Brexit that frankly their own six tests wouldn't pass where being in 'a' not 'the' customs union would set them free on trade deals around the world.And where being closely linked to the 'single market' but ending freedom of movement,I mean seriously!.Perhaps it's time that Labour should reveal their negotiating hand to the Government as an alternative proposal.And plus the fact that Corbyn said on record that Article 50 should have been triggered the day after the referendum means he is just as clueless as the rest of us.
I've mentioned this before but in an ideal world both Labour & Conservatives should have had a cross-party agreement on negotiations where they both respected & stood on Manifestos that involved leaving both the single-market & customs union.
Several fleshed out possibilities for trade-deal/EU Relationships mapped out for the public to at least support.But instead we have a government that conducts it's business in secrecy & agreements signed off where not even government/cabinet ministers & MP's are aware of whats going on.I've always believed May has been misguided by the wrong people throughout negotiations but with al the flak from both sides in a way I way I respect her.But what I have been disgusted with is that various people who are either no longer in politics or have no part in negotiations ie Tony Blair,Nick Clegg,Peter Mandleson,Alistair Campbell,Sadiq Khan etc can hold 'secret negotiations' with Barnier & the like poisoning the air & talking this country down believing EU being so hard-lined (Blair & co encouraging them to )will overturn or stop Brexit from happening.
The conundrum we have is a messy one with Theresa May actively saying back this deal,an unprepared no-deal or a 2nd Ref being the only options.A change of leader might be able to alter finer details of the deal May either doesn't want or is afraid to do.Labour remain supporters are trying to add amendments that will effectively stop a no-deal happening but in turn by them backing a 2nd Ref is saying we don't want the responsibility of stopping Brexit let the public do that instead.But there may be the very scenario should a leave vote win again they are pushing a Hard-Brexit that they rejected in the original referendum against their will.
I completely agree with Goodfella's analogy that part of an MP's responsibility is do the 'forensic research' or seek advice that some of us are unable to do & relay it to us & by those MP's advocating a 'Peoples Vote/2nd Ref' is merely re-iterating my earlier comment where they don't want the backlash of rejecting Brexit themselves they want the public to do the dirty work instead.But what exactly should the question be on a Peoples Vote/2nd Ref as remainers like Sadiq Khan,Chuka Umuna believe it should be accept the deal or remain in the EU (alienating leave voters like me who hate May's deal) or would the question be a 3 -pronged one.Mays Deal,No Deal or Remain which would in turn split the leave vote & mathmatically a result could determined on the winner receiving less than 50% of the vote.
Apologies for another long-winded comment (one of the reasons I hate coming back to this thread as it means constantly going back over old ground trying to articulate yourself).
I'm framing this bit!
(19-11-2018 16:24 )Jack the Nipper Wrote: [ -> ]I completely agree with Goodfella
I won't try to respond to the rest of it because there is too much to take in, but the thought of what a second referendum question might be is an intriguing one.
If it's a three-pronged question, then I agree that they might as well skip the referendum altogether, because Remainers would vote "Remain" and Leavers would have their vote split in two. We could skip the formalities altogether and just Remain, in that case, because it really would be a stitch-up.
If I were The Emperor, I would insist on no more referendums,
BUT there could only be free, un-whipped votes in Parliament from now on for anything Brexit-related. They created this mess -- they should deal with it, let the chips fall where they may, and then face their constituents like grown-ups.
Sadly, the closest I will ever come to being the Emperor is this...
(19-11-2018 16:24 )Jack the Nipper Wrote: [ -> ]I completely agree with Goodfella
When the funding of George Soros is referred to the Electoral Commission or the National Crime Agency, I will criticise his involvement.
For someone who in the previous paragraph referred to someone as a scumbag and makes a habitat of name calling just about every person in the public eye he doesn't like in his posts you don't half get triggered easily by my insinuations of Brexiteer intelligence , maybe don't dish it out in bucket loads if you can't take it back in thimble loads. Just because you didn't vote for the reasons above does not mean that many others did not, after all these were the main arguments the Leave campaigners were making (one of them was printed out in giant letter on the side of a fucking bus), someone had to vote on these factors, unless you are saying that the Leave campaign had no affect on the voters whatsoever and the result would of been the same without it.
Furthermore you mentioned that people will have voted to become an independent country, I have got news for you, Britain is an independent country in fact we are the country that most other countries celebrate their independence from. We independently opted into the EU with a referendum, we independently opted into what we wanted to do, we independently opted out of two of the EU's most integral policies (Schengen & The Euro), we independently vetoed the revised Lisbon treaty in 2011 (26-1 & because of the veto rules it was the 1 that won it, oh the oppression is too much to bare) and we independently held a referendum on our membership and independently triggered A50 as a result. I have always been amused by the Brexiteers that say that we are being subjected to the unelected dictatorship of Brussels, a dictatorship where you can refrain from 2 of its most integral aspects, have your agenda met when you are the only one who supports that agenda and then chose to leave at anytime through a vote. Don't think they have a good handle on what a dictatorship is and I don't think your argument does as much to separate you form the pack as you think it does
(18-11-2018 18:22 )mikedafc Wrote: [ -> ]For all those criticising Theresa May, I doubt that any of the Brexiteers would have got much more out of the EU. Ever since the vote the EU have made things as difficult as possible in the negotiations due to them knowing that Labour, Lib Dems, SNP etc wouldn't have allowed the British people a vote on whether they wanted to stay in the EU or not and have been very pro staying in the EU and stopping Brexit plus the EU wanted to scare any other country thinking of leaving the club. The EU have been able to stand back and allow those opposition parties plus the Labour/Lib Dem majority in the House of Lords to slow down the process and try to reverse the decision of the British people in the referendum. Since May gambled on a snap General Election and lost her majority in the House of Commons the EU's position has been strengthened further. After David Davis resigned as Brexit Secretary I have been waiting for their different plan/strategy to be put forward. I'm still waiting! The EU want us to stay in and they hope that the House of Commons voting down this deal will allow this to happen as our leaving puts depending on who you believe an £8-10 Billion pound a year hole in the EU budget
I think teresa may should of stuck to getting her tits out on page 3....
(18-11-2018 18:04 )goatman222 Wrote: [ -> ]^^
We need to build a wall
and put all the freeloading mep's up against it and shoot the fuckers...then tell the lords and the commoner mps they will be next if they dont get their fucking act together and stop trying to fuck us up the 'arris with their strap ons...
