Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I guarantee they will be more miffed if we don't leave.

I think we're going round in circles here.

 

Yes, of course, they likely will be, however, it's likely that at least a good proportion of Leavers will still be annoyed regardless of the type of Leave chosen. Not as annoyed as if the UK chose to remain, but annoyed enough to kick up a mighty fuss about it - look at, for instance, the clashes between Brexiteers in Parliament this week?

 

HF above highlights one such single issue - freedom of movement - which I pretty much guarantee will piss off a good proportion of leavers no matter what position is achieved on it.

[Voll Blau]

26 minutes ago, Webbo said:

You voted remain and you're telling me what leavers want?

No, I'm just not presuming - like you are - to know they'll be happier to be out than in no matter what circumstances they find themselves under.

 

I know friends, family, in-laws, acquaintances who all voted Leave. Put them all in a room together and they'd struggle to come up with a common consensus on what they believed would be achieved as a result of a Leave vote, and what they'll be happy with as a result of a Leave vote.

 

Ask a fair few of them if they would have voted Remain if they believed they'd achieve the same results that prompted them to vote Leave, and they'd have said yes. Ask the same people if they'll be happier with a Leave result than a Remain one as long as it means just what you said will be achieved, they'd say no.

[Heathrow fox]

I’m sure it’s mentioned before in this thread that Mr Cameron spelt it out in no uncertain terms what a leave vote would mean.He even gave every household a leaflet to read on the subject.

 

The biggest issue in the last cant remember general elections has been imagration.Rightly or wrongly that would have been in nearly every leave voters thought process when voting leave.

 

Keep freedom of movement and watch the country swing to the right.

[Izzy]

32 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

I’m sure it’s mentioned before in this thread that Mr Cameron spelt it out in no uncertain terms what a leave vote would mean.He even gave every household a leaflet to read on the subject.

 

The biggest issue in the last cant remember general elections has been imagration.Rightly or wrongly that would have been in nearly every leave voters thought process when voting leave.

 

Keep freedom of movement and watch the country swing to the right.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not Tony Blairs Labour government who was initially responsible for the increase in immigration?

 

Didn't that policy spark the uprising of UKIP, which in turn persuaded Cameron to call the referendum?

 

I might well be taking shite but I'm sure that's what I read somewhere...

[bovril]

19 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not Tony Blairs Labour government who was initially responsible for the increase in immigration?

 

Didn't that policy spark the uprising of UKIP, which in turn persuaded Cameron to call the referendum?

 

I might well be taking shite but I'm sure that's what I read somewhere...

Mate you're talking about immigration but he's talking about imagration. Two totally different issues. 

[Kopfkino]

2 hours ago, Beechey said:

With EEA you'd need to accept free movement, be a member of the Single Market as well as continue contributing to the EU budget. What kind of promises does that really fulfil? The only thing it removes is the Customs Union membership, which is the main sticking point because of the border with the Republic of Ireland.

 

No "off the shelf" options are suitable.

 

For the record however, I agree. The idea it must happen immediately is silly.

 

 

I'm not advocating EEA for perpetuity but as a stop gap that does in fact mean we leave the EU rather than, at the current rate, ending up in endless transition. Whether that means negotiating a different agreement or in fact, alongside the other EFTA members renegotiate it. I don't pretend it's ideal but it is the best option at the moment and the best way to portect interests.

 

Fair enough maybe it doesn't quite fulfil the promises entirely, particularly FoM. But still:

 

FoM is admittedly difficult. Under the EEA agreement we could unilaterally limit FoM under 'safeguard measures'. Liechtenstein have a quota agreed. Not for one minute do I think we could agree that as the EU wouldn't allow a big country to get away with it. Could we make 'safeguard measures' fly for a bit, probably. But yes it is an issue but it's going to be an issue anyway. This Labour Mobility Framework is going to end up being essentially the same agreement would be my guess.

 

I do agree that we need to leave SM to honour the vote. As part of the EEA you get access to the EUIM (Single Market). There seems to have been a conflation that EEA=Single Market=EU Internal Market. This isn't the case and the EEA gives access to EUIM but does not make you part of it. Hence you don't have to take part in CFP, CAP or ECJ supremacy.

 

We're going to paying in if we want to remain part of any agencies which is the current plan which is what Norway pays for at the moment. All other contributions Norway makes are either via EEA grants or via EFTA so not directly contributing to the EU budget as it doesn't just pay for access to EU markets but for other EFTA/EEA activities. I appreciate the public won't necessarily see it that way, but contributions would be down at least. 

 

[Webbo]

6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

I'm not advocating EEA for perpetuity but as a stop gap that does in fact mean we leave the EU rather than, at the current rate, ending up in endless transition. Whether that means negotiating a different agreement or in fact, alongside the other EFTA members renegotiate it. I don't pretend it's ideal but it is the best option at the moment and the best way to portect interests.

 

 

 

But that's what it would become.

[Carl the Llama]

8 hours ago, Buce said:

 

Give me back my rep point!

 

https://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/forums/europe-scandinavia-the-nordics/finland/is-finland-in-scandinavia-or-not

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/22jfrb/why_is_finland_not_considered_to_be_part_of/

 

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Finland-not-considered-a-Scandinavian-country

 

https://anthropologist.livejournal.com/816992.html

 

One nil and you fvcked it up, one nil and you fvcked it up...

 

 

Not a chance.  Even your own sources give examples of why Finland can be considered Scandinavian.  At the risk of upsetting the board's significant Finno-nationalist contingent I'm standing firm.

 

Upon VAR review the goal stands.

[Buce]

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Not a chance.  Even your own sources give examples of why Finland can be considered Scandinavian.  At the risk of upsetting the board's significant Finno-nationalist contingent I'm standing firm.

 

Upon VAR review the goal stands.

 

Taken from the website of the Finnish Embassy, London:

 

" Is Finland part of Scandinavia or is it a Nordic country?
Finland is part of the Nordic countries together with Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Denmark. Scandinavia comprises Sweden and Norway only."

 

http://www.finemb.org.uk/public/default.aspx?nodeid=44488&contentlan=2&culture=en-GB

 

F.A. inquiry overturns result - Carl gets a ten-match suspension for attempted match-fixing.

 

Give me back my rep point!

 

 

Edited 19 July 2018 by Buce

[bovril]

Buce is right. Scandinavia is the kind of flaccid penis bit. Finland (ball sack) definitely isn't Scandinavia. I just asked my Mum (Swedish roots) and she agrees. 

[ealingfox]

What's the point in having a group/region of just two countries? Even if it is just Sweden and Norway at the moment they should change it to include Finland and Denmark. I'll let them decide on Iceland between them.

[Bryn]

15 hours ago, Heathrow fox said:

The biggest issue in the last cant remember general elections has been imagration.Rightly or wrongly that would have been in nearly every leave voters thought process when voting leave.

 

Aye, probably immigration of populations from areas like North Africa and the Middle East which is only obliquely related to the EU.

[Alf Bentley]

14 minutes ago, bovril said:

Buce is right. Scandinavia is the kind of flaccid penis bit. Finland (ball sack) definitely isn't Scandinavia. I just asked my Mum (Swedish roots) and she agrees. 

 

I shall never again view a map of Northern Europe with the innocent eyes of yesteryear. 

 

I suppose, by extension, we now have to view Britain and Ireland as a couple of urine droplets shaken into the water and Iceland a stray droplet flying onto the carpet?

Edited 19 July 2018 by Alf Bentley

[Guest Foxin_mad]

15 hours ago, Webbo said:

At the minute there's no proof we would be worse off long term. If we left with no deal there would probably be 6 months of disruption/recession , which would affect the EU too, but we'd soon recover.

My concern is that it is likely to be a lot worse and a lot longer than that.

 

I see absolutely no cast iron plan from anyone in the leave camp on the situation where we have a hard Brexit, how are we going to keep the supply chain running for products we currently import and use in our manufacture? If EU Companies such as Airbus, BMW etc do decide to pull out of the UK, this has huge implications. Again Airbus for example has hundreds of thousands of jobs in the supply chain below, from parts makers, cleaners, bacon butty makers etc etc.

 

What one of the Brexiteers needs to do is come up with a plan on how things are going to work in the event of no deal? If the Brexiteers wont cross red lines then there absolutely wont be a deal because the EU wont cross them either. I am yet to see a coherent plan on a hard Brexit from anyone. There are 4 huge problems and many other ones:

 

1. How are we going to ensure continuality of the supply chain for British manufacturers using EU components

2. How will we ensure our components reach EU manufactures

3. Ireland - How do we stop a hard border if the EU demand one?

4. How do we ensure our imported food requirements remain undisrupted?

 

If we start having border checks, not only do we not have the resource and facility to do it competently and efficiently, it would could huge issues for our trade and industry as it is. Its all very well saying that Japan trades by itself as an Island nation for example, but it has been doing so for many years and has the capability and infrastructure to do that - we don't - I think our governments blue or red are incompetent and incapable of delivering such projects successfully. 

 

Now I am happy to see a plan on how all this works, but I am yet to see it. Leading Brexiteers like Boris are full of bluster but no substance. Why don't Gove, Boris, JRM and Davis get together and present us with a master plan if they think they can make it work, tell us FFS or is it because the have absolutely no idea? 

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Foxin_mad said:

My concern is that it is likely to be a lot worse and a lot longer than that.

 

I see absolutely no cast iron plan from anyone in the leave camp on the situation where we have a hard Brexit, how are we going to keep the supply chain running for products we currently import and use in our manufacture? If EU Companies such as Airbus, BMW etc do decide to pull out of the UK, this has huge implications. Again Airbus for example has hundreds of thousands of jobs in the supply chain below, from parts makers, cleaners, bacon butty makers etc etc.

 

What one of the Brexiteers needs to do is come up with a plan on how things are going to work in the event of no deal? If the Brexiteers wont cross red lines then there absolutely wont be a deal because the EU wont cross them either. I am yet to see a coherent plan on a hard Brexit from anyone. There are 4 huge problems and many other ones:

 

1. How are we going to ensure continuality of the supply chain for British manufacturers using EU components

2. How will we ensure our components reach EU manufactures

3. Ireland - How do we stop a hard border if the EU demand one?

4. How do we ensure our imported food requirements remain undisrupted?

 

If we start having border checks, not only do we not have the resource and facility to do it competently and efficiently, it would could huge issues for our trade and industry as it is. Its all very well saying that Japan trades by itself as an Island nation for example, but it has been doing so for many years and has the capability and infrastructure to do that - we don't - I think our governments blue or red are incompetent and incapable of delivering such projects successfully. 

 

Now I am happy to see a plan on how all this works, but I am yet to see it. Leading Brexiteers like Boris are full of bluster but no substance. Why don't Gove, Boris, JRM and Davis get together and present us with a master plan if they think they can make it work, tell us FFS or is it because the have absolutely no idea? 

the alternative DexEU plan has been leaked online, it's all there. The brexiteers are told they don't have a plan, if they put a plan out they're accused of undermining the govt.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

14 minutes ago, Webbo said:

the alternative DexEU plan has been leaked online, it's all there. The brexiteers are told they don't have a plan, if they put a plan out they're accused of undermining the govt.

I have never seen it but would be interested to view it.

 

I think they are already undermining the government anyway so they might as well show us properly what their proposals are and how they are going to guarantee jobs and prosperity long term. 

 

If they show a coherent plan people might actually be able to get behind it and support it. 

 

Its all just b/s I see at the moment, ask Boris about the Ireland border and he waffles on about technology. Tell us how technology is going to solve this problem

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I have never seen it but would be interested to view it.

 

I think they are already undermining the government anyway so they might as well show us properly what their proposals are and how they are going to guarantee jobs and prosperity long term. 

 

If they show a coherent plan people might actually be able to get behind it and support it. 

 

Its all just b/s I see at the moment, ask Boris about the Ireland border and he waffles on about technology. Tell us how technology is going to solve this problem

The technology is a!ready out there. We have different currency and vat rates with Ireland. The paperwork is filled in before the lorry leaves the warehouse, there's just the occasional random check.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

8 minutes ago, Webbo said:

The technology is already out there. We have different currency and vat rates with Ireland. The paperwork is filled in before the lorry leaves the warehouse, there's just the occasional random check.

I would imagine it becomes a lot more difficult than that if you start bringing different laws and standards frameworks into the process though. At present its very much based on trust, obviously we have a mutual trust arrangement in place with the EU at the moment. In a hard Brexit scenario I presume that mutual trust would not longer exist.

 

For example would we allow a similar technology boarder at Dover, with all the immigrants climbing into and hanging onto the back of trucks would that work??

 

Assuming an immigrant achieves 'free movement' to Ireland can they not just then walk across into the UK anyway?! 

 

it all seems to lack enough clarity to me. Government departments are already saying they wouldn't be prepared, that is the kind of situation where you generate big economic problems. 

 

I happy to listen to the argument but for me personally I am not seeing enough solutions. If for example I have a piece of moulded wood imported from Poland in my product, I want to be sure that is still available at the same or similar price after Brexit/Hard Brexit how will Boris enable that? 

 

 

Edited 19 July 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Webbo]

13 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I would imagine it becomes a lot more difficult than that if you start bringing different laws and standards frameworks into the process though. At present its very much based on trust, obviously we have a mutual trust arrangement in place with the EU at the moment. In a hard Brexit scenario I presume that mutual trust would not longer exist.

 

For example would we allow a similar technology boarder at Dover, with all the immigrants climbing into and hanging onto the back of trucks would that work??

 

Assuming an immigrant achieves 'free movement' to Ireland can they not just then walk across into the UK anyway?! 

 

it all seems to lack enough clarity to me. Government departments are already saying they wouldn't be prepared, that is the kind of situation where you generate big economic problems. 

 

I happy to listen to the argument but for me personally I am not seeing enough solutions. If for example I have a piece of moulded wood imported from Poland in my product, I want to be sure that is still available at the same or similar price after Brexit/Hard Brexit how will Boris enable that? 

 

 

 

we've said we're willing to trust them, they've managed to trust us for all these years, it's up to them if anything changes.

 

as for illegal immigrants crossing the border in Ireland, why can't they just fly into Heathrow like they do now?

[Guest Foxin_mad]

4 minutes ago, Webbo said:

we've said we're willing to trust them, they've managed to trust us for all these years, it's up to them if anything changes.

 

as for illegal immigrants crossing the border in Ireland, why can't they just fly into Heathrow like they do now?

I have a feeling it would change and the additional complexities may mean it has to, I don't know but no proposal really seems a ideal solution to me.

 

I suppose they could come across in the back of a lorry at Calais like they do now also, I would hope that our hard border checks would be a lot more stringent that they are now at all locations, but potentially no border in Ireland becomes an easy route into the UK with no checks. Surely that's a bit problematic? I don't know how they reliably police that without a border post.

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

Taken from the website of the Finnish Embassy, London:

 

" Is Finland part of Scandinavia or is it a Nordic country?
Finland is part of the Nordic countries together with Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Denmark. Scandinavia comprises Sweden and Norway only."

 

http://www.finemb.org.uk/public/default.aspx?nodeid=44488&contentlan=2&culture=en-GB

 

F.A. inquiry overturns result - Carl gets a ten-match suspension for attempted match-fixing.

 

Give me back my rep point!

 

 

 

Oh so now you're excluding Denmark too?  This is getting ridiculous!  The fine folk who literally define the English language need to be called in on this one:

Quote

 

Scandinavia

PROPER NOUN

1A large peninsula in north-western Europe, occupied by Norway and Sweden. It is bounded by the Arctic Ocean on the north, the Atlantic Ocean on the west, and the Baltic Sea on the south and the east.

1.1 A cultural region consisting of the countries of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark and sometimes also of Iceland, Finland, and the Faroe Islands

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Scandinavia

 

The FA decision has been referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport who have determined that the ruling was made using biased sources and personnel.  The FA punishment has been rescinded, Buce has been ordered to pay all legal costs and faces a fine for obstruction of justice, the withdrawal of reputation markers has been upheld.

[Innovindil]

**** me. I gave Buce the rep now can we get back to proper dramas damnit. 

 

 

[Buce]

 

 

14 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Oh so now you're excluding Denmark too?  This is getting ridiculous!  The fine folk who literally define the English language need to be called in on this one:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Scandinavia

 

The FA decision has been referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport who have determined that the ruling was made using biased sources and personnel.  The FA punishment has been rescinded, Buce has been ordered to pay all legal costs and faces a fine for obstruction of justice, the withdrawal of reputation markers has been upheld.

 

Clutching at straws now, Llama.

 

Even your own source says, " A large peninsula in north-western Europe, occupied by Norway and Sweden..."

 

And, " A cultural region consisting of the countries of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark and sometimes also of Iceland, Finland, and the Faroe Islands."

 

Even ignoring the use of the word sometimes (which you'll note is conveniently undefined), what you originally referred to when you incorrectly labelled the 'Norway model' as the 'Finnish model' was a political entity, not a cultural one.

 

The ECJ upholds Buce's appeal unanimously which overturns the decision of the CoAfS. In summing up, Justice Sven Carlson paid tribute to the persuasive evidence given by the delightful Mrs Bovril. Full legal costs awarded against the Llama, and an order made that all reputation points owed be paid immediately.

[Carl the Llama]

29 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

**** me. I gave Buce the rep now can we get back to proper dramas damnit. 

OBJECTION!

 

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

 

 

Clutching at straws now, Llama.

 

Even your own source says, " A large peninsula in north-western Europe, occupied by Norway and Sweden..."

 

And, " A cultural region consisting of the countries of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark and sometimes also of Iceland, Finland, and the Faroe Islands."

 

Even ignoring the use of the word sometimes (which you'll note is conveniently undefined), what you originally referred to when you incorrectly labelled the 'Norway model' as the 'Finnish model' was a political entity, not a cultural one.

 

The ECJ upholds Buce's appeal unanimously which overturns the decision of the CoAfS. In summing up, Justice Sven Carlson paid tribute to the persuasive evidence given by the delightful Mrs Bovril. Full legal costs awarded against the Llama, and an order made that all reputation points owed be paid immediately.

Unless I'm mistaken, sometimes =/= never.  Clearly my use of the term falls under the scope of "sometimes".

[Webbo]

1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

I have a feeling it would change and the additional complexities may mean it has to, I don't know but no proposal really seems a ideal solution to me.

 

I suppose they could come across in the back of a lorry at Calais like they do now also, I would hope that our hard border checks would be a lot more stringent that they are now at all locations, but potentially no border in Ireland becomes an easy route into the UK with no checks. Surely that's a bit problematic? I don't know how they reliably police that without a border post.

From The Irish Times;

Quote

 

The European Union has reassured the Government that no physical checks will be needed on the Border even if the UK crashes out of the bloc without a deal, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said.

Mr Varadkar said that such a “doomsday scenario” would mean that the “commitments of others” would be relied upon to prevent a hard border.

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/eu-calms-varadkar-s-fears-of-physical-border-checks-after-brexit-1.3569485#.W1AotXnJz3k.twitter