Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nick Palmer ponders: What should a Brexiteer do next?

SystemSystem Posts: 11,007
edited May 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nick Palmer ponders: What should a Brexiteer do next?

 

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Will probably emigrate.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,561
    Interesting, if harrowing, post Nick.

    Isn't there a risk for Tory hardliners that voting down whatever deal TMay eventually comes up with could lead to a 2nd referendum, which might narrowly be won by Remain?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Pointer, that brings us back to Grieve's idiotic response to what a 'meaningful vote' would have as a consequence, should it be lost, and he replied he hadn't a clue.

    I suspect, were we to have another vote, it would again be won narrowly (by which side I'm unsure) and that would deepen and prolong the bitter division rather than mend it.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    edited May 2018
    Remember. Nick P couldn’t contain his amusement at Gordon Brown signing the Lisbon treaty and the final country ratifying it, when Cameron had committed to holding a referendum on the treaty. I paraphrase but it was along the lines “what you going to do now Mr Cameron?”

    He called a referendum on our membership and the people said no. Well done.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,372
    DavidL said:

    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.

    Agreed, that would be the rational way to proceed.
    For some, though, the Brexit debate has moved well beyond reason, so the Palmer scenario is not entirely implausible.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,561
    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Though we agree on a lot of things, I don't like the suggestion of doing a Depardieu if things go badly from a personal political view. I'd make the same comment to all those PB Tories who have threatened to flounce off if Corbyn becomes PM. With a few notable exceptions* it is better to stay and argue for what you believe to be right imo.

    (*E.g. for German Jews in the 30s of course)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    The illusion behind this apparent dilemma is that the deal we will get with the EU will somehow become fixed in perpetuity. That is as absurd as saying that Maastricht was the final word on European integration.

    After we have left both sides will continue to evolve as will the relationship. I think there is likely to be a big push to integrate the EU and EZ institutions without Mr Awkward always being difficult in the corner. I also think that we will find that not being in the EU is remarkably like being in it but the proportion of our trade and investment there will diminish over time. We will find new things to cooperate on but we will also find that our different world views makes continued cooperation in some areas more problematic and quite possibly not worth it.

    I could be wrong. It may be that we will evolve a relationship that is membership in all but name being consulted on EU legislation even informally, for example. But my guess is that we will gradually drift apart whilst hopefully remaining friends and good trading partners. But anyone wanting to die in a ditch about the current deal really hasn't thought about the last 40 years, let alone the next 40.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Logical. However, the fruitcakes don’t have the numbers to secure no deal. They can lose this deal but they can’t stop a different one clearing Parliament (or substantially the same one, with a few faces changed at the top).

    They’re noisily impotent.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,964
    edited May 2018
    Of course these keen Brexiteer Tory MPs include (supposedly) Boris, Gove, Fox and Davis.

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, trade, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    There is a fundamental problem with the Brexit debate. It is not the Leavers who are stopping 'soft Brexit'. It is the EU.

    The Remainers have been whining about 'soft Brexit' like it means something, but none of them can define in any way what it is, other than the subset who openly support EEA membership. Of course, most Remainers can't support EEA because the requirement for FOM means that it is obviously contrary to the referendum result and they don't like being called on that.

    So they pretend that there is another 'soft Brexit' option. But the EU is constantly saying that this is not true.

    The EU are obsessed with cherry picking. They define that as not having all the 'benefits' of membership without the 'obligations'.

    The EU are the ones saying that they DON'T WANT the whole UK to stay in the CU as a backstop. Why? Because unlike the Remainers they are honest enough to say that CU membership requires full alignment with SM regulations. It is SM membership by proxy. And they won't accept it because it is cherry picking - SM membership without the four freedoms.

    Can ANY Remainer on here come up with any evidence that the EU would accept a 'soft Brexit' plan that does not involve accepting FOM? I doubt it. They just duck the issue (or, like HYUFD, just aim for a deal which pretends to halt FOM but in fact leaves it in place).

    Brexit was always a binary choice. It is not the Leavers that are saying so - ask your beloved EU.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Joining their voluble brethren who already have and who are excitedly wishing economic chaos on Britain in pursuit of their prejudices.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,135
    No deal is the best outcome.
    David L's gradualist solution is next best.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,561
    notme said:

    Remember. Nick P couldn’t contain his amusement at Gordon Brown signing the Lisbon treaty and the final country ratifying it, when Cameron had committed to holding a referendum on the treaty. I paraphrase but it was along the lines “what you going to do now Mr Cameron?”

    He called a referendum on our membership and the people said no. Well done.

    I think Nick was quite open about his views in the header. Surely a measure of a civilised person is the willingness to try to understand the motivation, thinking and potential actions of people who think differently to you?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Where do we stand to wave you goodbye?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    The illusion behind this apparent dilemma is that the deal we will get with the EU will somehow become fixed in perpetuity. That is as absurd as saying that Maastricht was the final word on European integration.

    After we have left both sides will continue to evolve as will the relationship. I think there is likely to be a big push to integrate the EU and EZ institutions without Mr Awkward always being difficult in the corner. I also think that we will find that not being in the EU is remarkably like being in it but the proportion of our trade and investment there will diminish over time. We will find new things to cooperate on but we will also find that our different world views makes continued cooperation in some areas more problematic and quite possibly not worth it.

    I could be wrong. It may be that we will evolve a relationship that is membership in all but name being consulted on EU legislation even informally, for example. But my guess is that we will gradually drift apart whilst hopefully remaining friends and good trading partners. But anyone wanting to die in a ditch about the current deal really hasn't thought about the last 40 years, let alone the next 40.

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    DavidL said:

    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.

    That isn't their way.

    And it is more likely that the initial adverse consequences will lead to public opinion starting to flow the other way.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000304647578537984

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000305492479172609

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000306023394136064

    The lesson the Zoomers have drawn from Brexit is that clarity is a killer. Obfuscate, prevaricate, waffle until you get over the line.

    Then the answer to any hard question can be "You lost! Get Over It!"
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,703

    Logical. However, the fruitcakes don’t have the numbers to secure no deal. They can lose this deal but they can’t stop a different one clearing Parliament (or substantially the same one, with a few faces changed at the top).

    They’re noisily impotent.

    Do the Brexiteers, perhaps especially Boris, ever wonder whether they should have been careful what they wished for?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,561

    Mr. Pointer, that brings us back to Grieve's idiotic response to what a 'meaningful vote' would have as a consequence, should it be lost, and he replied he hadn't a clue.

    I suspect, were we to have another vote, it would again be won narrowly (by which side I'm unsure) and that would deepen and prolong the bitter division rather than mend it.

    Therin lies the problem. The country is deeply split. Surely therefore, a soft-Brexit, maintaining a close Swiss or Norwegian relationship with the EU is best outcome - we will have left the EU but not trashed our economy.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Logical. However, the fruitcakes don’t have the numbers to secure no deal. They can lose this deal but they can’t stop a different one clearing Parliament (or substantially the same one, with a few faces changed at the top).

    They’re noisily impotent.

    Do the Brexiteers, perhaps especially Boris, ever wonder whether they should have been careful what they wished for?
    I’m not sure they’re capable of that level of self-analysis.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Where do we stand to wave you goodbye?
    On the ferry, looking back at Dover.

  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,561

    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.

    Good point - if it's really soft I could see a big swathe of Labour MPs abstaining or voting for "in the interests of the country".
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,982
    DavidL said:

    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.

    Leavers are going to have their work cut out just maintaining the status quo of the deal no matter how flacid it is. The millstones of European integration will turn anew and the dreams of the leavers are going to be ground between the runner and the base.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340


    I suspect, were we to have another vote, it would again be won narrowly (by which side I'm unsure) and that would deepen and prolong the bitter division rather than mend it.

    On this we agree. There’s no point in having a fresh vote unless there are clear signs that public opinion has decisively shifted. It would settle nothing.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    The illusion behind this apparent dilemma is that the deal we will get with the EU will somehow become fixed in perpetuity. That is as absurd as saying that Maastricht was the final word on European integration.

    After we have left both sides will continue to evolve as will the relationship. I think there is likely to be a big push to integrate the EU and EZ institutions without Mr Awkward always being difficult in the corner. I also think that we will find that not being in the EU is remarkably like being in it but the proportion of our trade and investment there will diminish over time. We will find new things to cooperate on but we will also find that our different world views makes continued cooperation in some areas more problematic and quite possibly not worth it.

    I could be wrong. It may be that we will evolve a relationship that is membership in all but name being consulted on EU legislation even informally, for example. But my guess is that we will gradually drift apart whilst hopefully remaining friends and good trading partners. But anyone wanting to die in a ditch about the current deal really hasn't thought about the last 40 years, let alone the next 40.

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Pointer, we voted to leave, not have the EU dictate our trade policy.

    If it had been 52% Remain, would you and Grieve and the Lords be arguing that was a mandate for withdrawing from certain aspects of the EU because 48% wanted to Leave?

    Of course not.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,023
    DavidL said:

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that.

    Do you think there'll still be a UK in 10-15 years time?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.

    That isn't their way.

    And it is more likely that the initial adverse consequences will lead to public opinion starting to flow the other way.
    Much more likely that there will be increased hostility to the EU if any part of the deal is thought to be "Not fair". We will need some enlightened leadership to ensure that hostility does not poison the well for both sides. That's a worry, I must admit.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    Scott_P said:

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000304647578537984

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000305492479172609

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000306023394136064

    The lesson the Zoomers have drawn from Brexit is that clarity is a killer. Obfuscate, prevaricate, waffle until you get over the line.

    Then the answer to any hard question can be "You lost! Get Over It!"
    And that's different from the last time?
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300


    I suspect, were we to have another vote, it would again be won narrowly (by which side I'm unsure) and that would deepen and prolong the bitter division rather than mend it.

    On this we agree. There’s no point in having a fresh vote unless there are clear signs that public opinion has decisively shifted. It would settle nothing.
    Even without such a shift, there is scope for a so-called Noel Edmonds (deal or no deal) referendum once the final package is known. This is close to what David Cameron should have arranged in the first place: a referendum between this particular "in" deal, and that particular "out" deal, which would have been negotiated or at least identified by royal commission as being negotiable.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The illusion behind this apparent dilemma is that the deal we will get with the EU will somehow become fixed in perpetuity. That is as absurd as saying that Maastricht was the final word on European integration.

    After we have left both sides will continue to evolve as will the relationship. I think there is likely to be a big push to integrate the EU and EZ institutions without Mr Awkward always being difficult in the corner. I also think that we will find that not being in the EU is remarkably like being in it but the proportion of our trade and investment there will diminish over time. We will find new things to cooperate on but we will also find that our different world views makes continued cooperation in some areas more problematic and quite possibly not worth it.

    I could be wrong. It may be that we will evolve a relationship that is membership in all but name being consulted on EU legislation even informally, for example. But my guess is that we will gradually drift apart whilst hopefully remaining friends and good trading partners. But anyone wanting to die in a ditch about the current deal really hasn't thought about the last 40 years, let alone the next 40.

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,964
    Scott_P said:

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000304647578537984

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000305492479172609

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000306023394136064

    The lesson the Zoomers have drawn from Brexit is that clarity is a killer. Obfuscate, prevaricate, waffle until you get over the line.

    Then the answer to any hard question can be "You lost! Get Over It!"
    Marvellous how you've moved on from this.

    'Posts: 21,367
    June 25
    JackW said:
    
4. Next PM. It's May for me, anyone but Boris.

5. Corbyn should go too. A total tool. About as effective as a leader and potential PM as a fart in a hurricane.

6.Lastly and this will shock many but Scotland should now opt for independence. There I said it. The will of the Scottish people on the EU, a matter of the most crucial significance for the future, was clear. Hopefully it will be an amicable uncoupling. I would vote for YES in SINDY2, if still around.

SINDY2 should take place within 18 months and a YES vote take effect on the date of BREXIT two years after Article 50 is enabled or before 2020 whichever is sooner.'

    Nice to see you Jack

I agree on all 3 points.'


    Any time you're ready, sport.

    https://twitter.com/lokiscottishrap/status/1000324712856158208
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that.

    Do you think there'll still be a UK in 10-15 years time?
    Yes.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    There does seem to be a lot of denial on both sides. I still expect we’ll leave, it will still be damaging and we’ll be taking about the aftershocks and problems for years to come.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Perhaps the only worst answer to "What currency will you use?" than "The pound but without a currency union" is "Don't know. Vote for total uncertainty!"

    It's certainly true both campaigns in the EU referendum were atrocious. But the question of currency wasn't and isn't on the table.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    Scott_P said:

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1000645014458896385?s=20
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187
    JRM says Theresa May is like Geoffrey Boycott.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,023

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.

    Rejoining would be subject to veto by any one of the EU27. It will become clear by next March that revoking Article 50 is the only sensible choice for anyone who wants the UK to survive.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    You take the deal and work to gradually unwind our links with the EU over time. Simples.

    That isn't their way.

    And it is more likely that the initial adverse consequences will lead to public opinion starting to flow the other way.
    Much more likely that there will be increased hostility to the EU if any part of the deal is thought to be "Not fair". We will need some enlightened leadership to ensure that hostility does not poison the well for both sides. That's a worry, I must admit.
    I think that you are right, people vest a lot of pride in their decisions on such visceral decisions. Any post Brexit difficulties will be blamed by the Leavers on EU intransigence rather than being a consequence of leaving the Union.

    The opinions of less fanatical folk in the middle may well drift to favour closer integration again, perhaps to EEA. Indeed if there was to be a consensus deal to unite the majority of the country it does have to have something for everyone, and not everything that everyone wants. Such is the meaning of compromise, and EEA status is the legal framework for that.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that.

    Do you think there'll still be a UK in 10-15 years time?
    Yes.
    Possibly with fewer component elements than at present though.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,965
    God showing his displeasure at the Irish vote:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44269304

    Unfortunately, his aim is not what it once was. Appears to have hit London, rather than Dublin.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,321

    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.

    It's one of several possible interesting dilemmas. If it appears that the deal is poor and rejecting it will lead to the Government falling, the pressure on them from members to vote no will be immense - I'd think it would be deselection territory if they saved the Tory government.

    Conversely the little group of Labour Leave MPs would need to decide if they preferred the bad deal (from a Leave viewpoint) plus retaining May to no deal. In both cases, working out what would happen if an election followed and Labour won would be relevant - the centrists would grab it if they thought it might mean staying in, the Leavers would run a mile. Another tactical reason for studied ambiguity, but that can't be maintained indefinitely.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Dr. Foxy, supposing we actually properly leave, it'll be interesting to see how the EU-philes handle things and if they opt for advocacy of the EEA rather than rejoining the EU.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,964

    Scott_P said:

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1000645014458896385?s=20
    You're just a bawhair away from rt-ing Tom Gallagher, Historywoman and Effie Deans.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,965

    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.

    It's one of several possible interesting dilemmas. If it appears that the deal is poor and rejecting it will lead to the Government falling, the pressure on them from members to vote no will be immense - I'd think it would be deselection territory if they saved the Tory government.

    Conversely the little group of Labour Leave MPs would need to decide if they preferred the bad deal (from a Leave viewpoint) plus retaining May to no deal. In both cases, working out what would happen if an election followed and Labour won would be relevant - the centrists would grab it if they thought it might mean staying in, the Leavers would run a mile. Another tactical reason for studied ambiguity, but that can't be maintained indefinitely.
    Really? Is it too much to expect as a voter that they might give some consideration as to what is in the country's best interests on such a crucial, era-defining issue?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    Remind me again what the clear and unified position on Scotland's currency was in 2014? I must have missed it.

    Clearly not having economics taught in any state school in Dundee was a more constructive step.
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Ivan Rogers has elegantly set out the idiocy of our current negotiating position, which is that we should have our own decision-making power while still having a formal hand in decisions made by the EU, whilst rejecting the ECJ. Utter nonsense.

    Eventually, Barnier will offer us an ultimatum (current terms with no say). That will be the ‘deal’.

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,023
    edited May 2018
    RoyalBlue said:

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.

    And what happens the day after 'no deal'? Are you up for being another Russia? Do you think the rest of the country is?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    tlg86 said:

    JRM says Theresa May is like Geoffrey Boycott.

    Well she couldn't do any worse than Stoneman, that's for sure.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Glenn, what a bizarre dichotomy. We aren't faced with a binary choice of being an EU member-state or Russia.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Mr. Glenn, what a bizarre dichotomy. We aren't faced with a binary choice of being an EU member-state or Russia.

    Venezuela as a third option?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    edited May 2018
    Mr. Jonathan, only if Corbyn gets in. Planning on voting for the self-declared friend of Hamas and admirer of Venezuelan economics to govern the UK? :)

    Edited extra bit: removed 'still' from the start of the second sentence, as it was erroneous.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:

    I know it's a crazy idea, but perhaps those committed Brexiteers could come up with a definitive, commonly-agreed-upon vision of the Brexit they want, with clear positions on immigration, customs unions, borders, NI etc? They hardly seemed to have moved on from..gulp..£350m on the side of a bus and fancy jam.

    Oops

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000303999369863168

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000304647578537984

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000305492479172609

    https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1000306023394136064

    The lesson the Zoomers have drawn from Brexit is that clarity is a killer. Obfuscate, prevaricate, waffle until you get over the line.

    Then the answer to any hard question can be "You lost! Get Over It!"
    And that's different from the last time?
    Absolutely! They’ve changed the comparator countries to benchmark against:

    Let's talk first about the 12 countries that have been selected as the list of "benchmark small advanced economies". There doesn't appear to have been an objective criteria applied to arrive at this list, and the extent of its subjectivity is perhaps best illustrated by looking at the list of "small countries used for comparison" when similar analysis was published in the Independence White Paper (page 620) back in 2013..

    The Scottish Government analysis in 2013 concluded that the superior GDP per Capita growth rate enjoyed by those countries that had "the bonus of being independent" was just 0.12% greater than Scotland's onshore economic growth over a 30 year period. That's quite a way short of the 0.7% we're now expected to believe we should expect, is it not?


    http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.id/2018/05/snp-growth-commissions-gdp-growth-rate.html?m=1
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    You're summary of Labour's range on leave is clearly incorrect since there some leave supporting mps, who actively supported it, not just unenthusiastically. Hardly characteristic of Labour of course, but if you're listing the range they exist.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    God showing his displeasure at the Irish vote:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44269304

    Unfortunately, his aim is not what it once was. Appears to have hit London, rather than Dublin.

    Its another beautiful morning here with the famous long hot summer of 2018, surely already one for the record books, continuing. Is there a real chance that the cricket will be interrupted today?
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,965
    DavidL said:

    God showing his displeasure at the Irish vote:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44269304

    Unfortunately, his aim is not what it once was. Appears to have hit London, rather than Dublin.

    Its another beautiful morning here with the famous long hot summer of 2018, surely already one for the record books, continuing. Is there a real chance that the cricket will be interrupted today?
    I'm in west London about five miles from Lords. I think it looks ominous for England: overcast but dry.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Mr. Jonathan, only if Corbyn gets in. Planning on voting for the self-declared friend of Hamas and admirer of Venezuelan economics to govern the UK? :)

    Edited extra bit: removed 'still' from the start of the second sentence, as it was erroneous.

    Who knows? Will try to find the least, worst option these days.

    Are you planning to vote for ideogical Brexit zealots like JRM, the antithesis of conservatism?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    God showing his displeasure at the Irish vote:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44269304

    Unfortunately, his aim is not what it once was. Appears to have hit London, rather than Dublin.

    Its another beautiful morning here with the famous long hot summer of 2018, surely already one for the record books, continuing. Is there a real chance that the cricket will be interrupted today?
    I'm in west London about five miles from Lords. I think it looks ominous for England: overcast but dry.
    Overcast and a new ball. What could go wrong?
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223

    RoyalBlue said:

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.

    And what happens the day after 'no deal'? Are you up for being another Russia? Do you think the rest of the country is?
    We will have 5 or 6 months to prepare . It will be grim to start, but the lights will stay on, supermarket shelves will be mostly full (albeit with a few gaps) and petrol will be available, if more expensive.

    In a year we’d have reached a new modus operandi.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Where do we stand to wave you goodbye?
    On the ferry, looking back at Dover.

    Ah, off to the sunlit-uplands of France then.

    *titter*
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,023
    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.

    And what happens the day after 'no deal'? Are you up for being another Russia? Do you think the rest of the country is?
    We will have 5 or 6 months to prepare . It will be grim to start, but the lights will stay on, supermarket shelves will be mostly full (albeit with a few gaps) and petrol will be available, if more expensive.

    In a year we’d have reached a new modus operandi.
    Will the new modus operandi involve a deal with the EU and on what terms?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    Given the parliamentary arithmetic the only easy path through woukd be a soft Brexit which labour lend support to, but even had May tried to go that route (and she didn't of course) Labour seem to keep shifting around the place and I cannot see that they woukd ever back the government's final position. If the government switched to labour's position now, Labour would switch to a new one.

    As for what those who want a much harder Brexit should do, they should bring down the government. It's unlikely to lead to what they want but trying to get a hard supporting leader who sonehow gains support for a hard position is their only chance. If they think it's the best option for the country I disagree but it's their duty to ignore party politics on it.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
    The error is the word "final". But we are repeating ourselves.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Will probably emigrate.

    Where do we stand to wave you goodbye?
    On the ferry, looking back at Dover.

    Ah, off to the sunlit-uplands of France then.

    *titter*
    You’ll have a terrific time over there complaining about foreigners and how things aren’t how they used to be. A home from home.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529

    Dr. Foxy, supposing we actually properly leave, it'll be interesting to see how the EU-philes handle things and if they opt for advocacy of the EEA rather than rejoining the EU.

    Just as there are varieties of Leaver, there are varieties of Remain. Some will only be happy with rejoining, but the EEA would suit many. The deal May is inching towards is EEA in all but name*. Making it official EEA membership simplifies the legal structures. FoM is the obvious obstacle, but could be tackled by moving to a more contributory form of welfare and tax policy, something that we should probably do so anyway because of non-EU migration. Of course we joined the EEC as we found EFTA arrangements were not working for us...

    * For example in the latest round of negotiations we have agreed automatic recognition of EEA/EU professional qualifications. From my perspective this is a massive advantage for departmental recruitment as the main obstacle to recruitment is professional qualifications, and the PLAB. Tier 2 visas is a relatively simple thing to change centrally.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
    The error is the word "final". But we are repeating ourselves.

    If there’s any hint it’s not final, the EU will be adding extra armour plating.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,177
    Leavers need to do absolutely nothing. Article 50 was triggered and we leave the EU on 29th March with a deal or without a deal. I don't see how a compromise will be found to allow any deal now:
    1. No majority in cabinet for either proposed customs plan
    2. No majority in parliament for either customs option or any other way forward
    3. The EU Commission has already rejected the plans as unworkable fantast
    4. The Irish government will veto

    We are heading for the hardest no deal splat Brexit next March. Without a deal to transition to there will be no transition. On 30th March we find out who is right about the impact of leaving the Customs Union and Single Market - Eurotunnel, HMRC, Business and Industry etc or Gove/Johnson/Corbyn

    Were I championing the fantastist view of Brexit I would be seeking to continue the current chaos that has stopped the process. Failure of the process leads to hard brexit, so make sure the process fails. Which is why having demanded parliamentary sovereignty they now denounce parliament for being sovereign, having demanding British judges have control they now denounce the judiciary for using it.

    The big unknown is the Labour position. Jezbollah appears to be carrying out his own policy regardless of what colleagues or members think, arbitrarily binning the 6 tests compromise as having accepted the government has failed our tests we won't vote for the single market alternative. Won't vote for the single market, won't vote for the customs union - Corbyn is backing Fox and Gove et al on hard Brexit. Only if we crash out of the EU and bring about a crisis in capitalism will we have True Socialism.

    Or we would have done until the extraordinary intervention by Momentum, denouncing the Great Leader for making it up as he goes along, pointing out that his democratic revolution doesn't change the fact that the membership are sovereign and we set the policy which he needs to follow. I expect a vote at Conference, I expect the leader and hard core loonies will denounce Momentum and try and block the vote, and I expect the vote will be to stay in the single market and customs union.

    Will it be too late by then...?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Jonathan, my vote at the next election won't alter us being in or out of the EU. Your line is reminiscent of the failed silliness of those who tried to 'campaign' for Remain by holding up a picture of Farage and effectively saying "Urrrgh! You're not with *him* are you?!"

    Your vote for Corbyn or not will determine whether we have someone who cannot be trusted on economics or defence, who has, contrary to most of his backbenchers and almost the entire international community, taken more heed of Putin's propaganda than the facts and explanations of the British authorities over Salisbury.

    May is a poor PM. I'd like to be able to vote for someone positively. But if the alternatives are someone who is a bit shit and someone who is a dangerously stupid man whose views are contrary to the interests of this nation then that's a very easy choice for me.

    It becomes more difficult if Corbyn ceases to be leader. Then, assuming they don't get some IRA-loving, Hamas-befriending buffoon to replace him, I'd have to think about whether to vote Labour or not. Which is an odd thing to type. But May is rubbish.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,845

    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.

    It's one of several possible interesting dilemmas. If it appears that the deal is poor and rejecting it will lead to the Government falling, the pressure on them from members to vote no will be immense - I'd think it would be deselection territory if they saved the Tory government.

    Conversely the little group of Labour Leave MPs would need to decide if they preferred the bad deal (from a Leave viewpoint) plus retaining May to no deal. In both cases, working out what would happen if an election followed and Labour won would be relevant - the centrists would grab it if they thought it might mean staying in, the Leavers would run a mile. Another tactical reason for studied ambiguity, but that can't be maintained indefinitely.
    The question is how many Labour MPs will vote against the deal purely to oppose the government, if doing so means that we leave with no deal?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    I would recommend staying calm, and being patient.

    We still have no idea what the final terms of the A50 deal will be, let alone the new FTA, and are speculating from a lot of noisy conjecture.

    I think there will be an acceptable compromise as realists from all sides recognise a deal must be struck that is politically sustainable.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
    The error is the word "final". But we are repeating ourselves.
    If there’s any hint it’s not final, the EU will be adding extra armour plating.

    I think that no one will want to re-open negotiations quickly (though regime change in the UK is pretty nailed on), but @DavidL is right and in 10 years there will need to be a review as both sides will have changed.

    I think it quite likely that we will be back in within my lifetime.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    On a lighter note, our current leader could be even more annoying:
    https://twitter.com/Longshanks1307/status/1000641258585509888
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,982
    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.

    And what happens the day after 'no deal'? Are you up for being another Russia? Do you think the rest of the country is?
    We will have 5 or 6 months to prepare . It will be grim to start, but the lights will stay on, supermarket shelves will be mostly full (albeit with a few gaps) and petrol will be available, if more expensive.

    What an uplifting prospectus.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I think there will be an acceptable compromise as realists from all sides recognise a deal must be struck that is politically sustainable.

    It's not the realists that are the problem.

    It's the unrealists, and they are the ones making the running right now
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,625
    Sandpit said:

    NB Nick Palmer’s analysis assumes that centrist dad Labour MPs will obey a whip to vote down a deal struck. That seems a brave assumption.

    It's one of several possible interesting dilemmas. If it appears that the deal is poor and rejecting it will lead to the Government falling, the pressure on them from members to vote no will be immense - I'd think it would be deselection territory if they saved the Tory government.

    Conversely the little group of Labour Leave MPs would need to decide if they preferred the bad deal (from a Leave viewpoint) plus retaining May to no deal. In both cases, working out what would happen if an election followed and Labour won would be relevant - the centrists would grab it if they thought it might mean staying in, the Leavers would run a mile. Another tactical reason for studied ambiguity, but that can't be maintained indefinitely.
    The question is how many Labour MPs will vote against the deal purely to oppose the government, if doing so means that we leave with no deal?
    People seem to view that prospect as remote, rightly or not, so I'd think most of them.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Ace, Hannibal led an army through the Alps in winter. Alexander faced armies that massively outnumbered him. I'm not sure leaving the EU is worthy of trembling.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
    The error is the word "final". But we are repeating ourselves.
    If there’s any hint it’s not final, the EU will be adding extra armour plating.

    They are at least as likely to want future changes as us.

    Once the major European tech companies are all based in London they are going to want some say on how they operate across Europe, for example.

    Once it becomes obvious that London is even more important for capital investment, currency trading and the trading of EU companies than it is now they will want to increase their reach by integrating financial services regulation. A serious attack on the Euro membership or gilts of an EU country happening almost entirely out of their jurisdiction will make them rethink.

    Once the UK starts to impose greater restrictions on the use of our fishing grounds by companies actually, if not legally based in Spain, they will be looking to reach agreements about that.

    Once the UK starts to seriously compete on tax rates.

    I could go on all day. This is and will continue to be a multifaceted and complex relationship. Aspic is never going to be the answer.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    RoyalBlue said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    I would rather it be rejected. May can call another referendum for the country to back no deal if she wants, but I don’t think it’s necessary. She would win it.

    And what happens the day after 'no deal'? Are you up for being another Russia? Do you think the rest of the country is?
    We will have 5 or 6 months to prepare . It will be grim to start, but the lights will stay on, supermarket shelves will be mostly full (albeit with a few gaps) and petrol will be available, if more expensive.

    In a year we’d have reached a new modus operandi.
    That Brexit manifesto in full.
    The lights will stay on, though. Rejoice, rejoice!
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Mr. Ace, Hannibal led an army through the Alps in winter. Alexander faced armies that massively outnumbered him. I'm not sure leaving the EU is worthy of trembling.

    The Roam Empire collapsed when its supply lines were cut.

    Just like UK car manufacture...
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited May 2018
    Having been in the South of france for the last several weeks it kept occuring to me that if only the 17 million Brexiteers had seen at first hand the practical advantages of being able to move to or through a smorgasbord of cultures and languages without restriction the vote would almost certainly have been different.


    Europe is a very special continent. The most cultured and varied in the world. To be an integral part of it is a great privilege and anything that draws us closer and gives us the simplest access the better. Remain should have set its sigts on the common currency and shengen and not allowed the the Little Englanders to frame the debate around a fear of foreigners.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    That Brexit manifesto in full.
    The lights will stay on, though. Rejoice, rejoice!

    Wish harder, people!!!
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited May 2018

    I would recommend staying calm, and being patient.

    We still have no idea what the final terms of the A50 deal will be, let alone the new FTA, and are speculating from a lot of noisy conjecture.

    I think there will be an acceptable compromise as realists from all sides recognise a deal must be struck that is politically sustainable.

    Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

    At present we just get the latter. No deal is possible. Serious economic disruption is possible. We need more than blind faith.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. P, is that a typo for Roman or a reference I don't get?

    Mr. Roger, using pejorative terms about the majority of the electorate is the kind of complacent arrogance that helped secure a shock win for Leave.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    Roger said:

    Having been in the South of france for the last several weeks it kept occuring to me that if only the 17 million Brexiteers had seen at first hand the practical advantages of being able to move to or through a smorgasbord of cultures and languages without restriction the vote would almost certainly have been different.


    Europe is a very special continent. The most cultured and varied in the world. To be an integral part of it is a great privilege and anything that draws us closer and gives us the simplest access the better. Remain should have set its sigts on the common currency and shengen and not allowed the the Little Englanders to frame the debate around a fear of foreigners.

    I absolutely agree Europe is a very special continent with remarkable variety. Its political institutions, not so much.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Roger said:

    Having been in the South of france for the last several weeks it kept occuring to me that if only the 17 million Brexiteers had seen at first hand the practical advantages of being able to move to or through a smorgasbord of cultures and languages without restriction the vote would almost certainly have been different.


    Europe is a very special continent. The most cultured and varied in the world. To be an integral part of it is a great privilege and anything that draws us closer and gives us the simplest access the better. Remain should have set its sigts on the common currency and shengen and not allowed the the Little Englanders to frame the debate around their loathing of foreigners.

    the Europe you want could quite happily have emerged if politicians had let it evolve at its own pace. The fissures in the EU edifice are mainly due to federalists pushing an agenda the electorate isn't ready for.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Mr. P, is that a typo for Roman or a reference I don't get?

    Mr. Roger, using pejorative terms about the majority of the electorate is the kind of complacent arrogance that helped secure a shock win for Leave.

    Technically not a majority of the electorate, just a majority of those who turned out.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The EU are not going to want a deal that can be renegotiated annually. Whatever is put forward will be put forward on a basis that it is a lasting settlement, with provisions designed to ensure that.
    That's what every set of politicians have said about every EU treaty for the last 30 years. Its just not true. The relationship between the EU and Switzerland continues to evolve too and will continue to do so.

    The EU in 10-15 years time will be a materially different institution from the one we are leaving. There is a very small chance it will break up. There is a much greater probability that it will be far more integrated and a lot further down the path to Nick's one country concept.

    It will be obvious that the UK will never fit into that. So politicians will look for the best relationship we can have to fit those circumstances. Its their job.
    I question your “obvious” in a week that has shown how dramatically public opinion in a neighbouring country can change in a generation.

    And your basic point is still wrong. Even the most demented of Leavers is going to accept that whatever final settlement is reached with the EU, after what might be a dozen or more years negotiating it, is going to have to be left alone for quite a long while.

    Remainers will have more of a case for earlier future changes if Leavey aspects of that settlement are seen to be working against Britain’s interests. Leavers, having taken control, are going to have to take ownership of that settlement. If they don’t, Britain will rejoin in the absence of any credible alternative.
    As I say change can go either way. But change is inevitable.
    If Leavers are going to disown the final settlement, Britain should just stay in the EU now and save everyone the inconvenience, because if so they are already strategically defeated.
    The error is the word "final". But we are repeating ourselves.
    If there’s any hint it’s not final, the EU will be adding extra armour plating.
    I think that no one will want to re-open negotiations quickly (though regime change in the UK is pretty nailed on), but @DavidL is right and in 10 years there will need to be a review as both sides will have changed.

    I think it quite likely that we will be back in within my lifetime.

    There's a distinct possibility that the original final deal would not have been completed in 10 years time.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Mr. P, is that a typo for Roman or a reference I don't get?

    Typo
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,023

    Roger said:

    Having been in the South of france for the last several weeks it kept occuring to me that if only the 17 million Brexiteers had seen at first hand the practical advantages of being able to move to or through a smorgasbord of cultures and languages without restriction the vote would almost certainly have been different.


    Europe is a very special continent. The most cultured and varied in the world. To be an integral part of it is a great privilege and anything that draws us closer and gives us the simplest access the better. Remain should have set its sigts on the common currency and shengen and not allowed the the Little Englanders to frame the debate around their loathing of foreigners.

    the Europe you want could quite happily have emerged if politicians had let it evolve at its own pace. The fissures in the EU edifice are mainly due to federalists pushing an agenda the electorate isn't ready for.
    The migration crisis was caused by a federalist agenda?
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Roger said:

    Having been in the South of france for the last several weeks it kept occuring to me that if only the 17 million Brexiteers had seen at first hand the practical advantages of being able to move to or through a smorgasbord of cultures and languages without restriction the vote would almost certainly have been different.


    Europe is a very special continent. The most cultured and varied in the world. To be an integral part of it is a great privilege and anything that draws us closer and gives us the simplest access the better. Remain should have set its sigts on the common currency and shengen and not allowed the the Little Englanders to frame the debate around a fear of foreigners.

    Ah, so Europe, and by extension Europeans are better than other continents and other peoples?

    It’s a rather 19th century view.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Jonathan said:

    Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

    At present we just get the latter. No deal is possible. Serious economic disruption is possible. We need more than blind faith.

    52% voted for blind faith.

    It's the will of the people
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,943
    edited May 2018
    It is certainly very possible that around 100 Tory MP pro Brexit ERG hardliners led by Mogg will vote down the deal as conceding too much on regulatory alignment, not being tough enough on EU immigration and still too big an exit bill etc. In that case whether the bill passes or not is largely in the hands of Labour MPs and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Of course on the Iraq War vote Blair saw slightly over 100 Labour MPs vote against him but was helped in passing the vote and defeating an amendment by rebel Labour backbenchers by most Tory MPs voting for, including the Tory leader IDS.

    If Labour MPs mostly vote down the deal then May will have to resign, probably to be replaced by a more convinced Brexiteer like Boris, Gove or even Mogg who would then face Corbyn most likely shortly after in a general election with the prize a chance to be PM of a UK out of the EU with no transition period or FTA in prospect and heading to WTO terms
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    edited May 2018
    Scott_P said:

    Jonathan said:

    Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

    At present we just get the latter. No deal is possible. Serious economic disruption is possible. We need more than blind faith.

    52% voted for blind faith.

    It's the will of the people
    52% voted for national independence and democracy, even if that means short-term minor economic disruption.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    RoyalBlue said:

    52% voted for national independence and democracy, even if that means short-term minor economic disruption.

    As I said, blind faith.
This discussion has been closed.