European Union Referendum

[BigDaveCUFC]

Ah another poll, at least we can rely on these things.....

its for me one of the most significant polls.

brexit cannot really be stopped because a fair democratic vote did decide the majority want to leave.....BUT even if the papers are correct that say 60-65% of the leave voters will take Brexit at ANY cost, that still means the majority do not want to leave the EU at ANY cost........you add the 35% of leave voters to the 48% of remain voters and that means a clear majority saying they want to keep certain areas........mainly the single market at ANY cost.

Its as if that 48% has been completely wiped out in some nuclear war since the referendum......its only what that 52% want and if a majority of them want to plunge country in the sh*t to leave on their terms then it doesn't matter as a majority of them wish it..............ignoring fact that really unless all 52% want this situation the majority now swings the other way.

 

[Laker]

its for me one of the most significant polls.

brexit cannot really be stopped because a fair democratic vote did decide the majority want to leave.....BUT even if the papers are correct that say 60-65% of the leave voters will take Brexit at ANY cost, that still means the majority do not want to leave the EU at ANY cost........you add the 35% of leave voters to the 48% of remain voters and that means a clear majority saying they want to keep certain areas........mainly the single market at ANY cost.

Its as if that 48% has been completely wiped out in some nuclear war since the referendum......its only what that 52% want and if a majority of them want to plunge country in the sh*t to leave on their terms then it doesn't matter as a majority of them wish it..............ignoring fact that really unless all 52% want this situation the majority now swings the other way.

I've given up trusting polls full stop at the moment. They could tell me that 100% of people believe grass to be green and I'd still want to see he results of them actually voting that way before believing it's true.

So sorry, but I don't believe the statistics you've quoted in your post.

 

[Laker]

Sorry, very belated response, but I think this was precisely why a lot of us were somewhat opposed to having a referendum in the first instance. We essentially reduced a very complex relationship, forged over a 40 year+ period, to a binary Yes/No vote. The very notion was farcical. To my mind, the Lib Dems are only trying to proffer solutions to what was a very poorly conceived exercise...

I agree but I will state again that nearly all people voting out at the time considered it to be "fully out", not a half way house.

 

[JaseTheVillain]

I agree but I will state again that nearly all people voting out at the time considered it to be "fully out", not a half way house.

I see what he's saying though, 'nearly all' still translates as a narrow remain win in the event that not all people who voted leave (including myself) wanted this fucking mess out of things.

 

[Laker]

I see what he's saying though, 'nearly all' still translates as a narrow remain win in the event that not all people who voted leave (including myself) wanted this fucking mess out of things.

Fair enough, hadn't thought of it that way.

I do wonder what people who voted leave but want to stay part in are trying to achieve though - going part out (EEA for example) just seems like a poorer version of what we already had in the EU (same rules but less say). It seemed clear to me that the best two options on the table were fully in and fully out, depending on which side of the fence you happened to fall.

 

[.V.]

We are seeking a transitional period now, but I thought it was meant to be all milk and honey. Of course us seeking a transitional period will only further strengthen the EUs hand.

 

[Laker]

We are seeking a transitional period now, but I thought it was meant to be all milk and honey. Of course us seeking a transitional period will only further strengthen the EUs hand.

"Ofcourse" - explain?

It's pretty clear that the EU and UK won't be able to cover off everything in two years so an extended period makes sense - in fact most sensible people would have expected it. That doesn't make the decision to leave wrong (as the decision was always a long term one rather than just the period of leaving), just means we won't be sticking rigidly to the two year timeline outlined by the EU originally.

 

[Aber gas]

"Ofcourse" - explain?

It's pretty clear that the EU and UK won't be able to cover off everything in two years so an extended period makes sense - in fact most sensible people would have expected it. That doesn't make the decision to leave wrong (as the decision was always a long term one rather than just the period of leaving), just means we won't be sticking rigidly to the two year timeline outlined by the EU originally.

All about the long term gains innit mate?

 

[.V.]

"Ofcourse" - explain?

It's pretty clear that the EU and UK won't be able to cover off everything in two years so an extended period makes sense - in fact most sensible people would have expected it. That doesn't make the decision to leave wrong (as the decision was always a long term one rather than just the period of leaving), just means we won't be sticking rigidly to the two year timeline outlined by the EU originally.

Because any transitional periods needs to be agreed by all member states of the EU and it's something we're seeking, not them. Up to them to grant it.

 

[Laker]

All about the long term gains innit mate?

Anyone making the decision to vote remain based on the possibility/probability of it being a pain in the arse to negotiate our way out really is missing the point.

 

[Laker]

Because any transitional periods needs to be agreed by all member states of the EU and it's something we're seeking, not them. Up to them to grant it.

I guarantee they grant it. It's not in the EU's interest for Britain to "fall off a cliff" as it has been described. For example, the Germans are not exactly going to tolerate tariffs for their cars so this will either be resolved or a transition period agreed.

V, I love democracy and that everyone has the right to say what they want but a little bit of balance and realism rather than pure doom would give your posts so much more credibility.

 

[Aber gas]

Anyone making the decision to vote remain based on the possibility/probability of it being a pain in the arse to negotiate our way out really is missing the point.

What's the point then as you see it?

 

[Laker]

What's the point then as you see it?

Control, power, not being hamstrung by the EU etc. It certainly isn't "fuck, these negotiations might take a bit of work, let's stay".

 

[Aber gas]

Anyone making the decision to vote remain based on the possibility/probability of it being a pain in the arse to negotiate our way out really is missing the point.

Also, it's not just "a pain in the arse" it's a complete shambles. When the Mail is saying Leave has lost the economic argument Brexit is in trouble.

 

[Aber gas]

Control, power, not being hamstrung by the EU etc. It certainly isn't "fuck, these negotiations might take a bit of work, let's stay".

What part of your life was hamstrung by the EU? I'm not trying to be arsey or owt. I'm genuinely interested in what you hope we can do that we can't do under the EU. I see a lot of words like "control" "power" but I struggle to understand what that actually means in practice.

 

[Laker]

What part of your life was hamstrung by the EU? I'm not trying to be arsey or owt. I'm genuinely interested in what you hope we can do that we can't do under the EU. I see a lot of words like "control" "power" but I struggle to understand what that actually means in practice.

One thing I was keen on was supporting the steel companies (and I don't expect alot to change under the tories) but it would have been impossible for the government to support the industry under EU law even if they wanted to. In addition, rather than promoting UK industry, the EU funded a €80m loan to Ford to move production of the Transit to Turkey. So that's two examples.

I also believe there are many EU standards/regulations we are required to adhere to which are not necessary for our country. I work in accountancy - Intrastat and EC sale reporting along with the reverse charge VAT regime are 3 examples just off the top of my head. These add unnecessary admin to workplaces which can/should be avoided. I understand EU legislation with regards to environmental, health & safety in the workplace (my dad's area of work) is very much a "tick box" approach rather than a more logical "principles" based approach. Again the admin could be so much better.

On a wider basis, we are bound by whatever trade agreement the EU negotiates on our behalf with other states which I feel is a "one size fits all" approach. I think we can broker our own agreements. (One which doesn't allow cheap dumping of Chinese steel would be a good starter)

In addition, the U.K. has been a net contributor to the EU and so I believe we can allocate those funds better than we are presently receiving.

With regards to concerns like workers rights, ours are already stronger than most EU countries so I fail to see that as a legitimate concern.

Finally, I have no problem with the concept of immigration but I would like us to actually control numbers and track who is coming into this country. That would seem like a fair approach to me. I think we have a very highly populated country (well England is anyway) and a lowering of present immigration levels seems logical to me.

So yes - control, power and hamstrung by the EU etc. Fully accept others may disagree with those views (and fully believe you'll probably try to pick these apart but there you go).

 

[Aber gas]

One thing I was keen on was supporting the steel companies (and I don't expect alot to change under the tories) but it would have been impossible for the government to support the industry under EU law even if they wanted to. In addition, rather than promoting UK industry, the EU funded a €80m loan to Ford to move production of the Transit to Turkey. So that's two examples.

I also believe there are many EU standards/regulations we are required to adhere to which are not necessary for our country. I work in accountancy - Intrastat and EC sale reporting along with the reverse charge VAT regime are 3 examples just off the top of my head. These add unnecessary admin to workplaces which can/should be avoided. I understand EU legislation with regards to environmental, health & safety in the workplace (my dad's area of work) is very much a "tick box" approach rather than a more logical "principles" based approach. Again the admin could be so much better.

On a wider basis, we are bound by whatever trade agreement the EU negotiates on our behalf with other states which I feel is a "one size fits all" approach. I think we can broker our own agreements. (One which doesn't allow cheap dumping of Chinese steel would be a good starter)

In addition, the U.K. has been a net contributor to the EU and so I believe we can allocate those funds better than we are presently receiving.

With regards to concerns like workers rights, ours are already stronger than most EU countries so I fail to see that as a legitimate concern.

Finally, I have no problem with the concept of immigration but I would like us to actually control numbers and track who is coming into this country. That would seem like a fair approach to me. I think we have a very highly populated country (well England is anyway) and a lowering of present immigration levels seems logical to me.

So yes - control, power and hamstrung by the EU etc. Fully accept others may disagree with those views (and fully believe you'll probably try to pick these apart but there you go).

On steel, there is no EU law preventing aid to the steel industry as any deal would fall outside their remit. The UK has repeatedly lobbied against raising tariffs on Chinese steel so I don't think we'll be making any changes there.
Ford did get a loan to upgrade the Turkish factory. The factory in Southampton ( ford Uk) also had a EU loan which failed to save it. The issue here is Ford not the EU.
Accountancy isn't summat I'm particularly knowledgeable about ( although it does form part of my job) but I know that Intrastat has been vital in investigating fraud, money laundering and corruption. Seems a fair enough trade off for a bit of admin.

"Tick box" " principals" is all really vague. Health and safety isn't an admin burden but vital legislation imo. I've generally found EU regulations to be sensible and easy to follow especially in the areas of food production and construction.

Again with the Steel Britain wanted lower tariffs. If you think amazing trade deals are suddenly going to present themselves then I wish you luck sir but it ain't going to happen. We will be poorer ( some Brexit fanatics think this is fine)

We already control our borders and if you think immigration will lessen you're going to be really disappointed. Leading Brexit figures are already trying to organise exemptions for their respective industries. Is having a couple less foreign types about really worth tanking the economy? Perhaps it is for you, I don't know.

As for picking apart your points. Well, that's debate. Sorry not sorry.

 

[smat]

"German car manufacturers" is the new £350m for the NHS imo.

 

[Laker]

On steel, there is no EU law preventing aid to the steel industry as any deal would fall outside their remit. The UK has repeatedly lobbied against raising tariffs on Chinese steel so I don't think we'll be making any changes there.
Ford did get a loan to upgrade the Turkish factory. The factory in Southampton ( ford Uk) also had a EU loan which failed to save it. The issue here is Ford not the EU.
Accountancy isn't summat I'm particularly knowledgeable about ( although it does form part of my job) but I know that Intrastat has been vital in investigating fraud, money laundering and corruption. Seems a fair enough trade off for a bit of admin.

"Tick box" " principals" is all really vague. Health and safety isn't an admin burden but vital legislation imo. I've generally found EU regulations to be sensible and easy to follow especially in the areas of food production and construction.

Again with the Steel Britain wanted lower tariffs. If you think amazing trade deals are suddenly going to present themselves then I wish you luck sir but it ain't going to happen. We will be poorer ( some Brexit fanatics think this is fine)

We already control our borders and if you think immigration will lessen you're going to be really disappointed. Leading Brexit figures are already trying to organise exemptions for their respective industries. Is having a couple less foreign types about really worth tanking the economy? Perhaps it is for you, I don't know.

As for picking apart your points. Well, that's debate. Sorry not sorry.

EU law v steel - yes there is.
Chinese steel tariffs - point is we can now do it if a govt (labour?) wanted to.
Ford loan - the fact a loan from the EU moved jobs from the UK is not a good thing.
Intrastat is the collection of EU goods trade data. The fact it is poorly audited, not completed accurately (or at all in some cases) renders it a pointless admin exercise. There are wider issues with regards to fraud than this.
Tick box v principles underpins the whole Sarbanes Oxley debate. Call it vague all you like.
We've covered steel.
Trade deals - I don't expect magic deals. But I think we can tailor these to our own economy rather than using a deal which fits 28 countries' needs.
"Tanking the economy" - lol ok let's see. Exemptions for specific industries makes sense to me. Why not?
I'm not a good debater and my comment would be that good debaters can win arguments even when their argument is wrong. You can pick my points apart as much as you line but it just proves to me you are good at arguing rather than your point is right.
Your apology is accepted. x

 

[Laker]

"German car manufacturers" is the new £350m for the NHS imo.

I used it as an example here really, it wasn't really the focal point of my argument, more an easy way to put my point across.

 

[.V.]

I guarantee they grant it. It's not in the EU's interest for Britain to "fall off a cliff" as it has been described. For example, the Germans are not exactly going to tolerate tariffs for their cars so this will either be resolved or a transition period agreed.

V, I love democracy and that everyone has the right to say what they want but a little bit of balance and realism rather than pure doom would give your posts so much more credibility.

The Germans will put access to the larger market first, which is something Fox etel have found out.

I do too, but democracies reserve the right to change their mind; it's why we have election cycles. A referendum once the actual terms are known is not something I'm against.

I don't see any credible evidence to suggest that Brexit will be a success. How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

I look forward to being blamed for the economic fallout as I can see the excuses already. 'If only Europe had given us what we wanted' and 'if only the remoaners had got behind Brexit Britain'. Too which I will probably say 'how about you own the mess we're in seeing as you Brexiteers wanted out'.

 

[Krazy8]

How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

 

[Aber gas]

How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

 

[Look Out There Are Llamas]

How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

 

[Aber gas]

How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

 

[Laker]

The Germans will put access to the larger market first, which is something Fox etel have found out.

I do too, but democracies reserve the right to change their mind; it's why we have election cycles. A referendum once the actual terms are known is not something I'm against.

I don't see any credible evidence to suggest that Brexit will be a success. How do you see a post Brexit Britain realistically looking?

I look forward to being blamed for the economic fallout as I can see the excuses already. 'If only Europe had given us what we wanted' and 'if only the remoaners had got behind Brexit Britain'. Too which I will probably say 'how about you own the mess we're in seeing as you Brexiteers wanted out'.

Your position may well be as you describe but I can't help but think you (and some other remainers) actually want Brexit not to work as you'd rather justify your view than swallow your pride.

I described the aspects I disliked which apparently weren't correct (Ho hum) so you should be able to gather what sort of country I would like. Whether we end up there immediately is another thing altogether but the ability (or lack thereof) of our negotiators now won't be the be all and end all of our post Brexit life. I imagine things will continue to change and evolve as our membership of the EU originally did.

 

[.V.]

Your position may well be as you describe but I can't help but think you (and some other remainers) actually want Brexit not to work as you'd rather justify your view than swallow your pride.

I described the aspects I disliked which apparently weren't correct (Ho hum) so you should be able to gather what sort of country I would like. Whether we end up there immediately is another thing altogether but the ability (or lack thereof) of our negotiators now won't be the be all and end all of our post Brexit life. I imagine things will continue to change and evolve as our membership of the EU originally did.

I'll be happy to be proved wrong, if we are prosperous outside of the EU.

Having said that even if it is a success, I will miss visa free travel to Europe.

 

[Laker]

I'll be happy to be proved wrong, if we are prosperous outside of the EU.

Having said that even if it is a success, I will miss visa free travel to Europe.

Let's wait and see on the visa front. If it's a US style ESTA scheme then I don't think it'll be too bad.

 

[smat]

Now we're just shitting ourselves.

 

[Look Out There Are Llamas]

Nah mate, it's all good, look http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40972776