Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Webbo]

4 minutes ago, Donut said:

But theyve already agreed lots of principles you cant get out of? Theyve decided to put a hard border in ireland, theyve decided to come out of the customs union or form their own, decided on trade deals for x years or projects.

 

Can you get out of all these things? Can the next govermment undo all this?

They can try to renegotiate them but both sides have to agree.

[Donut]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

But you didn't vote for the rules that we have under the EU now so you haven't got less choice than you had before

But im supposed to have MORE?

 

But all the rules are still decided FOR me. I dont stand to gain anything.

 

I could vote to "boot out" a political party anyway i could vote for the opposition anyway.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Donut said:

But theyve already agreed lots of principles you cant get out of? Theyve decided to put a hard border in ireland, theyve decided to come out of the customs union or form their own, decided on trade deals for x years or projects.

 

Can you get out of all these things? Can the next govermment undo all this?

Have you got a link to this? Where have we decided to put a hard border up?

 

As for the other parts, the government won an election 8 months ago where they comitted to those things, the Labour party also at that time supported it. If the public wanted a government to remain in the SM and CU they could have voted for the Lib Dems, Greens or the SNP. 

 

Instead 85% of the electorate didn't .

[lifted*fox]

Just now, MattP said:

And then we can boot them out if we don't like it.

 

Brilliant, taking back control.

 

You are one of the best leave posters on here.

 

we get to boot them out now - do you really think policies are going to change that much just because we're out of the EU?

 

so funny how you and Webbo paint this picture of the EU as being some nightmare monster that's held us back for so many years yet neither of you are willing to share how it's personally affected your lives in a negative manner. 

 

our government is full of cvnts with shit policies now and it'll be full of cvnts with shit policies long after the EU is gone. 

 

party A will **** you, get voted out and then party B will **** you, get voted out. the same game that's going to get played whether we're in the EU or out of the EU. 

 

you two would make great politicians tbh - full of hot air and only care about yourselves. 

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Donut said:

But im supposed to have MORE?

 

But all the rules are still decided FOR me. I dont stand to gain anything.

 

I could vote to "boot out" a political party anyway i could vote for the opposition anyway.

 

 

Well you're no worse off. You never had the opportunity to vote out the European Commission.

[Sharpe's Fox]

20 minutes ago, MattP said:

Love it. It's how I imagine a Labour party hen night to be.

Edited 23 February 2018 by Sharpe's Fox

[lifted*fox]

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

As for the other parts, the government won an election 8 months ago where they comitted to those things, the Labour party also at that time supported it. If the public wanted a government to remain in the SM and CU they could have voted for the Lib Dems, Greens or the SNP. 

 

Instead 85% of the electorate didn't .

 

it wouldn't surprise me if a large proportion of those who voted labour probably thought it was also a vote for remain. 

 

if you hadn't done any research (which let's face it - most people probably didn't do much) then that's very much how the last election appeared. 

 

conservatives leave, labour remain.

 

as you've said that obviously wasn't the case but to many it would have seemed that way. 

[Buce]

 

UK's aspirations for post-Brexit trade deal an illusion, says Donald Tusk

EU leaders left incredulous by reports emerging about Theresa May’s strategy following Chequers meeting

 

Theresa May’s reported agreement with her cabinet on a future trading relationship with the EU has been criticised as based on “pure illusion” by the European council president, Donald Tusk, as frustration with the UK erupted in Brussels.

Reports that Theresa May’s inner cabinet had agreed on a policy of “managed divergence” during eight hours of talks at an awayday in Chequers were met with incredulity by EU leaders.

Tusk told reporters: “I am glad the UK government seems to be moving towards a more detailed position. However if the media reports are correct I am afraid the UK position today is based on pure illusion. It looks like the cake [and eat it] philosophy is still alive.

 

“From the very start it has been a set principle of the EU27 that there cannot be any cherrypicking of single market à la carte. This will continue to be a key principle, I have no doubt.

“I am absolutely sure we will be extremely realistic as 27 in our assessment of the proposals.”

Speaking at a summit of the 27 other EU member states in Brussels, to discuss the EU’s budget and leadership post-Brexit, Leo Varadkar, the Irish taoiseach, also insisted that the single market was “not à la carte”.

It is believed the UK government is seeking to maintain frictionless trade in some sectors by staying in lock-step alignment with EU regulation, while opening up the prospect of diverging in other areas in order to gain a competitive advantage in the international marketplace.

Varadkar told reporters: “It is not possible for UK to be aligned to EU when it suits and not when it doesn’t. The UK needs to square that circle. It doesn’t appear that the circle has yet been squared.

“The UK position needs to be backed up with real detail that can be written into a legal treaty with the EU. We are well beyond the point of aspirations and principle. We need detail.”

Senior EU diplomats said expectations were now low for Theresa May’s speech – planned for next Friday – in which she will offer her vision of the future trading relationship between the EU and the UK.

The Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte, who met May in London earlier in the week to deliver an uncompromising call for a clear and realisable vision from the UK government, said: “As good friends [of the Brits], we can bring the difficult messages like I did at Downing Street, asking Theresa May to be as clear as possible on what she wants to achieve on the second phase of negotiations.”

May is to set out next week what she hopes will be the defining vision of the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU, but faces warnings that even if she manages to unite the Conservative party around her plan, Brussels could stay resistant.

The prime minister will speak next Friday – it has not yet been confirmed where – to outline the fruits of the marathon discussions at Chequers in which she and her inner cabinet sought to thrash out a strategy acceptable to the various Brexit camps.

But with reports from inside Thursday’s talks at the PM’s country retreat saying the aim was one of targeted divergence from EU regulations, experts said there were likely to be accusations of cherrypicking.

Another conflict is expected over the rights of EU nationals arriving in the UK during the post-Brexit transition period. May’s spokesman reiterated on Friday that these would be less than those enjoyed by existing residents, an idea viewed in Brussels as unacceptable.

Ructions are likely over attempts by rebel Tory MPs, possibly backed by Labour, to force the government to commit to remaining in some form of customs union after departure, with a new parliamentary amendment gathering support.

May’s spokesman said the talks at Chequers had agreed “the basis of the prime minister’s speech on the future relationship”. He said: “Discussions will now take place at cabinet and you expect the prime minister to deliver her speech next Friday.”

 

While May will hope her vision will unite enough of her MPs to be seen as credible, it could be a different matter with the EU, which has repeatedly said it does not want a Brexit model where the UK chooses in which areas to diverge on regulations.

Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform thinktank, said the approach agreed at Chequers seemed to be the so-called baskets model, where the UK would align with the EU in some areas, have some alignment in others, and none elsewhere.

“I think there’s no chance of the EU agreeing to the proposal,” he said. “The EU’s obsessed with the level playing field. It doesn’t trust any enforcement mechanism proposed by the British to police it adequately.”

May’s preferred option on new rules for EU nationals might also not survive contact with Brussels, Grant added. “My guess is Mrs May will find a way of climbing down gracefully, and giving the EU most of what it wants.”

May’s chosen approach rejects the idea of being in any form of customs unions with the EU, with the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, stressing on Friday that this would not happen.

When the government’s trade bill returns to the Commons, MPs will vote on an amendment proposed by a group of remain-minded Conservatives – Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Stephen Hammond and Jonathan Djanogly – as well as Labour’s Chuka Umunna, calling for a continued customs union.

With at least four other Conservatives likely to back the amendment, it could pass if Labour supported the measure. This is, however, by no means certain.

Jeremy Corbyn is to make a Brexit speech on Monday in which he could clarify the party’s position, after he and several other Labour frontbenchers indicated they could back membership of a customs union.

Separately, May risks upsetting hardline Brexiters in her own party with a proposal to sign up certain industrial sectors, such as chemicals, to the monitoring of the relevant EU regulators, according to a report by Bloomberg.

While this would help access to EU markets, the regulators are overseen by the European court of justice, an organisation May has previously promised would have no role in UK affairs after Brexit.

Tusk and the leader of the European commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, enjoyed a joke in Brussels at the expense of the former British prime minister David Cameron who opposed Juncker’s candidacy as commission president.

In response to Juncker asking about the fate of Cameron, Tusk responded: “I have heard some rumours that he is in a quite comfortable position.”

Juncker responded: “He wanted me to be in such a comfortable position but he did not succeed.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/23/eu-pours-cold-water-on-uk-hopes-of-chequers-brexit-breakthrough

Edited 23 February 2018 by Buce

[lifted*fox]

speaks volumes that we're trying so desperately to keep some form of trade agreement.

 

our government and their financial / economical advisers clearly think we need trade with the EU as other trade routes aren't as convenient / good for our economy.

 

if all these american chickens and african apples or whatever the **** were so profitable and beneficial to us we'd be making clear cut ties from the EU, trade included.

 

you must be delusional at this point to think that ever our own government thinks we'll be ok without the EU. 

 

they're just going along with it to save face otherwise it'll be the end of the party completely. 

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

It wouldn't surprise me if a large proportion of those who voted labour probably thought it was also a vote for remain. 

Completely agree. I'm convinced a lot of Labour voters, especially younger ones, didn't know what they were voting for.

 

Amazing really, in terms of voting since 1976, Corbyn is more Eurosceptic than even Farage.

 

People really should watch or read the news.

[lifted*fox]

there is still the possibility that perhaps people knew what they were voting for but didn't think any of the other parties would get in anyway so wanted a Labour brexit over a conservative brexit. 

 

that was very much my decision. whilst Corbyn may want out of the EU I'd rather entrust this country to him without the EU rather than the conservatives without the EU. 

 

but yeah, probably a mix of both of the above. 

Edited 23 February 2018 by lifted*fox

[Webbo]

25 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

speaks volumes that we're trying so desperately to keep some form of trade agreement.

 

our government and their financial / economical advisers clearly think we need trade with the EU as other trade routes aren't as convenient / good for our economy.

 

if all these american chickens and african apples or whatever the **** were so profitable and beneficial to us we'd be making clear cut ties from the EU, trade included.

 

you must be delusional at this point to think that ever our own government thinks we'll be ok without the EU. 

 

they're just going along with it to save face otherwise it'll be the end of the party completely. 

It's not an either or. We can have trade deals with the EU and others.

[Carl the Llama]

54 minutes ago, Webbo said:

But you didn't vote for the rules that we have under the EU now so you haven't got less choice than you had before

Absolutely if you ignore the MEP elections and our own national elections to select our reps at the EP and EC respectively.

[Carl the Llama]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

It's not an either or. We can have trade deals with the EU and others.

But the EU is the world's strongest trading bloc and it's right on our doorstep and now we're forgoing all kinds of benefits and special privileges with that trading bloc so we can import lower standard products at greater shipping costs from farther away places. Logic.

[Webbo]

3 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

But the EU is the world's strongest trading bloc and it's right on our doorstep and now we're forgoing all kinds of benefits and special privileges with that trading bloc so we can import lower standard products at greater shipping costs from farther away places. Logic.

It's declining in it's share of world trade. Exports to the EU are only 12% of our economy. We already export more to the rest of the world than the EU

 

.As for the transport bit, have you ever seen New Zealand lamb for sale in a shop or Anchor butter? It doesn't get much further away than that and yet they still manage to make money.

[Webbo]

8 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Absolutely if you ignore the MEP elections and our own national elections to select our reps at the EP and EC respectively.

Sorry, did Donut get the chance to pick our reps at the EP and EC? 

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Sorry, did Donut get the chance to pick our reps at the EP and EC? 

Yes. There were elections. 

[Carl the Llama]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

It's declining in it's share of world trade. Exports to the EU are only 12% of our economy. We already export more to the rest of the world than the EU

 

.As for the transport bit, have you ever seen New Zealand lamb for sale in a shop or Anchor butter? It doesn't get much further away than that and yet they still manage to make money.

What about share of our imports? 

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Yes. There were elections. 

But Donut said this;

1 hour ago, Donut said:

But im supposed to have MORE?

 

But all the rules are still decided FOR me. I dont stand to gain anything.

 

I could vote to "boot out" a political party anyway i could vote for the opposition anyway.

 

 

The govt choose the reps not him so he hasn't gained anything.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

What about share of our imports? 

Why's that our worry?

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

But Donut said this;

The govt choose the reps not him so he hasn't gained anything.

OK before I respond I'd just like you to clarify what you think I mean by EP and EC and the elections for them. Your line about govt choosing those reps suggests you don't understand the terms adequately.

[Webbo]

3 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

OK before I respond I'd just like you to clarify what you think I mean by EP and EC and the elections for them. Your line about govt choosing those reps suggests you don't understand the terms adequately.

They were your terms. I assume you meant European president and European commission. You said

Quote

 and our own national elections to select our reps at the EP and EC respectively.

 

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Why's that our worry?

Because if we're relying on a lot of products from there then it's in our interests to retain or improve the standard of those products without sacrificing costs. If we have to find alternatives which are either worse or more costly then we lose out.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

Because if we're relying on a lot of products from there then it's in our interests to retain or improve the standard of those products without sacrificing costs. If we have to find alternatives which are either worse or more costly then we lose out.

They'll only be more costly if we decide to impose tariffs on them, nobody has suggested that we do that. If we buy our food at world prices we'll be better off.

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

They were your terms. I assume you meant European president and European commission.

Sorry I thought it was obvious that by talking about MEP elections and national elections that EP meant Euro Parliament and EC the council. I'll try not to assume these things in future.