Brexit: give me a positive effect... III

[Kirk]

Chat? istm I’m just answering your questions and I’m flattered you think I have the answers. There are nearly 29,000 members and I’m sure they’re all on the edge of their seat at this new member’s continuing inquisition.

I have plenty of time.

Next..

Clearly, probably too much time - often leads to overthinking.

Onto Brexit...and "hard remainers" - why do you think they are anti-democratic?

 

[tuga]

Thanks for writing all that so I don't have to.

The simple truth is that if the UK wants access to the single market, it must adhere to the rules. The more the UK diverges from those rules, the less access it will have (or the more costly access will be). The EU has been clear about this from day 1 and it's a testament to the awfulness of the public debate that so many people remain ignorant of this fundamental fact four years after the referendum..

This is not to say that the EU might not make a small number of minor concessions, but these will usually be in its own interests too. I'm also sure that the EU will be happy to agree a face-saving form of words for whatever deal is announced. But if we want access to the single market, we will have to pay for it, one way or another.

 

[Colin Barron]

What woulda decent deal look like to you?

Negotiated fishing rights and free of ECJ.

 

[stephen bennett]

... it's a testament to the awfulness of the public debate that so many people remain ignorant of this fundamental fact four years after the referendum..

Many MPs seem ignorant of this too. Francois and his clones for several.

Stephen

 

[tuga]

I quite like the irony on this one:

 

[SteveS1]

What if Boris gets a decent deal?

Good deals go to people who co-operate and are themselves in a position of strength. Despite your preoccupation with what you perceive the EU's position to be, the UK's is weaker.

 

[roman]

Negotiated fishing rights and free of ECJ.

Is that in keeping with your hopes for Brexit at the time of the referendum?

 

[tuga]

Negotiated fishing rights and free of ECJ.

Would you be happy with the EFTA court?

 

[tuga]

Clearly, probably too much time - often leads to overthinking.

Onto Brexit...and "hard remainers" - why do you think they are anti-democratic?

I'm sure it's 'cause we lost...

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Negotiated fishing rights and free of ECJ.

Is that it?

All this shit, and that’s what matters to you?

Not bothered about customs checks, tariffs, paperwork, holdups of JIT supplies, education, control of radioactive isotopes, aviation safety, cross border crime and law enforcement, data sharing...

 

[stevec67]

Isn't that full membership all over again?

Well, that's what a good deal looks like to me. I don't want the pound to be worthless, I don't want to be unable to travel freely, and I don't want UK trade to suffer. To name but 3. So if I get this in December I'll eat humble pie and Colin can tell me I was a fool to doubt Boris.

 

[roman]

Is that it?

All this shit, and that’s what matters to you?

Not bothered about customs checks, tariffs, paperwork, holdups of JIT supplies, education, control of radioactive isotopes, aviation safety, cross border crime and law enforcement, data sharing...

Babies and bathwater come to mind.
Sledgehammers and nuts...

 

[tuga]

That is probably true and is something the remain campaign should have highlighted, surely?

It wouldn't have made any difference.
The whole idea of BREXIT as taking back control and controlling immigration and making the UK great again was far more appealing and, more importantly, a lot easier to grasp.

 

[SteveS1]

Is that it?

All this shit, and that’s what matters to you?

Not bothered about customs checks, tariffs, paperwork, holdups of JIT supplies, education, control of radioactive isotopes, aviation safety, cross border crime and law enforcement, data sharing...

The bit where fish the UK catches is around 13% outside of UK waters and 70% of all of the UK catch is sold into the EU has passed him by. As does the level (over 55%) of foreign ownership of most of the UK's remaining fishing fleet. It really is naive symbolism at best, or a lack of concern for the real consequences across the board.

Perhaps Brexiteers want to start another squabble with Iceland, the last one went well.

 

[Brian]

Of course the EU can set the conditions for entry and membership of the SM. Name me an organisation with a member's ownership that doesn't decide it's own.

The UK is seeking to remain in all but name regarding the benefits of the SM, but wants to be free of conditions and obligations that bind the other members. It's "negotiation" is for something the EU had never said is on offer. The UK voting to leave is it's own decision, having been made aware of the terms (indeed the UK played a leading role in specifically formulating them). Can't you see the irony in such an attitude? We helped make leaving the SM punitive (presumably because we assumed it would apply to others), now we are demanding that we are somehow treated differently.

It would be like me complaining that you won't negotiate on the price of your house. You never said it was available. I can keep making increasingly lucrative offers until you decide you might like to sell it after all, but that's a whole different thing to it having been available.

Personally, I don’t know the detail of what the UK is hoping for from the ‘negotiations’.

 

[Kirk]

Is that it?

All this shit, and that’s what matters to you?

Not bothered about customs checks, tariffs, paperwork, holdups of JIT supplies, education, control of radioactive isotopes, aviation safety, cross border crime and law enforcement, data sharing...

That's what the Daily Express tells him matters.

 

[Brian]

Clearly, probably too much time - often leads to overthinking.

Onto Brexit...and "hard remainers" - why do you think they are anti-democratic?

That’s something else I’ve already answered.

Next..

 

[Brian]

It wouldn't have made any difference.
The whole idea of BREXIT as taking back control and controlling immigration and making the UK great again was far more appealing and, more importantly, a lot easier to grasp.

Was it?

 

[roman]

The bit where fish the UK catches is around 13% outside of UK waters and 70% of all of the UK catch is sold into the EU has passed him by. As does the level (over 55%) of foreign ownership of most of the UK's remaining fishing fleet. It really is naive symbolism at best, or a lack of concern for the real consequences across the board.

Perhaps Brexiteers want to start another squabble with Iceland, the last one went well.

Fish are a popular cause because they are a more tangible and emotive topic than some of the more esoteric stuff that's much harder to grasp.

 

[SteveS1]

Personally, I don’t know the detail of what the UK is hoping for from the ‘negotiations’.

You could put a contribution value on various aspects, frictionless borders, reciprocal tariff free arrangements, that sort of thing and perhaps pay a bit more for that (imagine how that would go with the Brexit press). But significant changes or exemptions from the actual regulatory framework would seem unreasonable without something substantial in it's place. That would further alienate a voting base that have been told that this is all very easy and without negative consequence.

You can see why "no-deal" is being positioned as heroic, or buccaneering. Because the reality is that we entered into treaties and arrangements that gave benefits in return for obligations and the pretence that the benefits could come without them was absurd. So it has to made to look somehow 'brave' to do without them.

I'm sure that some flexing will take place and face-saving forms of words might feature, but right now I certainly don't see where. Moreover, either outcome - no deal with resulting economic damage, or a good deal but with accusations of sell out or BINO, has considerable downsides for the government (like we care, I know) but the consequences of no-deal will be serious for us all.

This is why this is damage limitation, there is nothing in this mess for us in the short or medium term for sure. The longer term was, I suggest, not on anyone's mind except the younger voters and we know which way they saw it.