Brexit matters

[Chester1]

The point is EU members converse with other EU members using English. English is the lingua franca of the EU. Knowledge of other languages is not essential. If it was so important, Irish people would be about as Eurosceptic as British people. The main difference between Britain and Ireland is the Irish haven't been fed a diet of Europhobia from their politicians and media.


NI were sorted even before this as most of them enjoy Irish citizenship.

I was referring to the trading arrangements which would either cause the end of the UK or restart the troubles depending on which side of the argument people were on. We have jumped in last day or so from just a legal text (that the UK government was threatening to rip up) to a full agreement on risk rating of goods, procedures, staffing and monitoring. Despite the current situation re trade talks it would be a big news if people cared about Northern Ireland.

 

[radamfi]

I was referring to the trading arrangements which would either cause the end of the UK or restart the troubles depending on which side of the argument people were on. We have jumped in last day or so from just a legal text (that the UK government was threatening to rip up) to a full agreement on risk rating of goods, procedures, staffing and monitoring. Despite the current situation re trade talks it would be a big news if people cared about Northern Ireland.

I already posted above that on Radio Ulster, Unionists were "spitting blood" about it. This is obviously good news.

 

[edwin_m]

Did you miss the "Project Fear" campaign ?

A prejudicial name for what I referred to as "the way the Remain campaign seemed unwilling to make its own case" and someone else has describe as focusing on the disbenefits of Brexit rather than the benefits of remaining. To be fair it's always easier to see the disadvantages of the current position and to be swayed by the claimed benefits of something different, than to see that actually the situation you are in might be better than any of the alternatives (aka "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence").

Most of it was predictions by reputable individuals, that may yet happen once we are practically as well as officially separate from the EU - in three weeks time. The supposed benefits of leaving were mostly lies pushed by charlatans.

 

[Vespa]

It's somewhat overshadowed by the brinkmanship and showmanship on the trade agreement, which directly affects everyone in the rest of the UK. Most of whom have never cared much about NI anyway and might actually be quite glad if it joined the Republic.

It's not a club we don't like, it's a club you don't like. And I for one don't want to be a member of a club run by the people who currently run the UK.

With the narrow majority in the referendum, if even a small fraction of the Leave voters had voted the other way then the result would have been to remain. It's reasonable to expect that some of them would have been keen on keeping all those things you claim you were happy to lose, and many prominent Leavers claimed we would keep. From autumn 2017 onwards, as the implications of leaving started to become clearer, almost every poll showed a narrow majority in favour of staying in. But the government stuck with the spurious "will of the people" argument and railroaded it through.

As an unapologetic Remainer I strongly resent the way this deal (or lack of) was wilfully mis-sold to the public by the Leave campaign, and indeed the way the Remain campaign seemed unwilling to make its own case. Instead of recognising the narrowness of the result and trying to compromise, the Leave side pushed further and further to the extreme, seemed to go out of its way to alienate those who disagreed, and gave Scotland and Northern Ireland some excellent arguments for leaving the UK. This included the ejection of the sensible and competent elements of the Tory party, who tended to see the folly of Brexit and tried to moderate if not to stop it entirely. So, combined with the hopelessness of the Corbyn alternative, we were saddled with the most useless government in living memory, led by the biggest liar to hold a poliltical post. Just as we were heading into the worst crisis since WW2, which has damaged Britain more than almost any other country.

Poll are meaningless, it's the actual votes that counted, that said the General Election with an 80 seat majority based on a clear Brexit mandate, is very comprehensive, effectively a second referendum, the red wall rejected Labour who have alienated their core voters many Labour areas in the North are strong leave, yet Labour treated them as deluded fools who don't know what they're voting for, not a very good election strategy.

Project Fear strategy backfired rather spectacularly.

It hadn't occured to Remainers that they could possibly be wrong about the EU, that's how entrenched it is.

 

[Chester1]

A prejudicial name for what I referred to as "the way the Remain campaign seemed unwilling to make its own case" and someone else has describe as focusing on the disbenefits of Brexit rather than the benefits of remaining. To be fair it's always easier to see the disadvantages of the current position and to be swayed by the claimed benefits of something different, than to see that actually the situation you are in might be better than any of the alternatives (aka "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence").

Most of it was predictions by reputable individuals, that may yet happen once we are practically as well as officially separate from the EU - in three weeks time. The supposed benefits of leaving were mostly lies pushed by charlatans.

The sheer duration and frequency of negative predictions have set the bar for success at an incredibly low level. Anything short of a total disaster will be greated by relief. It was a mistake to not to build the remain campaign around a pro European message and then to repeat the same strategy to try to stop brexit. There were many brexit voters with an attachment to Europe but a dislike of the EU as an institution who could have been won over by a positive message.

 

[alex397]

It hadn't occured to Remainers that they could possibly be wrong about the EU, that's how entrenched it is.

Sure, there are some remainers who are rather over the top, but that's quite a generalisation there. There are many remainers who are also critical of the EU, myself included. I don't really understand people who are completely pro the EU, and those who are completely against it - that leaves no room for critical thinking. While there are some things about the EU I disagree with, I mostly agree with the EU and what it represents.
Now we are leaving the EU, we will have less say in what improvements could be made to the union - we have less power to change it for the better.

The sheer duration and frequency of negative predictions have set the bar for success at an incredibly low level. Anything short of a total disaster will be greated by relief. It was a mistake to not to build the remain campaign around a pro European message and then to repeat the same strategy to try to stop brexit. There were many brexit voters with an attachment to Europe but a dislike of the EU as an institution who could have been won over by a positive message.

Agree with this. I like to think I knew enough about then EU before the referendum, but there has been lots I've learnt about since then which has made me even more of a Remainer. I don't think there is enough knowledge about what being part of the EU actually means.

 

[XAM2175]

I see no reason why we should stay, because we never had and never would make use of our membership.

How exactly do you arrive at this conclusion? Political involvement aside, the UK's membership in the EU - and particularly the Single Market (of which Mrs Thatcher was one of the most ardent supporters) - allowed British businesses to sell goods and services to the continent with unprecedented ease and allowed British businesses and consumers the same access to European businesses. Several European regulatory agencies had major offices in the UK. British and European universities exchanged students and collaborated on research projects. British security agencies co-operated extensively with their European counterparts. British travellers enjoyed access to public healthcare services on the continent by way of the mutual recognition arrangements. Over a million British citizens have used the Freedom of Movement provisions to live and work in the EU and EEA, and to retire to its sunnier climes, and many many more Britons used those same provisions to take seasonal work in hospitality and all sorts of other sectors. And so on and so on... it's the fact that we did get such use out of membership that's making it so difficult to throw away!

And yes it is true that many of these things can be achieved to some extent or another without SM or EU membership, but that doesn't change the fact that all of the existing agreements have been junked and there's precious little in the offing to replace them right now.

Now when you talk political investment - yeah, that was a joke. And then we piled extra comedy on top of it by returning Charlatan-in-Chief Farage as an MEP time and time again. Such a staunch defender of the interests of the UK that he managed to avoid attending forty-one of the forty-two meetings of the European Parliament's fisheries committee held in the three years up to 2018.

Even still, it was a solid use of our membership - inasmuch as it was so laughably easy for governments of all flavours to blame any and all inconvenient or unpopular policy on the EU. How many people here know, for example, that extending the PRM TSI requirements to all rolling stock and not just new orders was a decision made not in Brussels but in London?

Its interesting how little attention the deal yesterday on Northern Ireland has received in the media. Its not just that the UK ditched the breaches to the withdrawal treaty, the rules and procedures to manage the NI protocol have been agreed by the EU and the UK. The list of imported goods considered to be low, high and medium risk and the subsequent processes for them have also been agreed. Its a collosal step to resolving Northern Ireland as a brexit issue. Considering the weight put on Northern Ireland being a full part of the UK by brexiteers and the emphasis on the risk to the Good Friday Agreement by remainers (and "Irish" Americans), you would think finalising Northern Ireland's post brexit arrangements would be massive news.

I suggest it's 1) because NI is not a particularly important place or issue to many people on either side and thus was only worthy of attention while it was particularly relevant to a point, and 2) because while this is a very big bit of progress (especially regarding the IMB clauses) it's not really a resolution to the specific issues affecting NI. It still leaves the customs border between NI and GB, which is far from satisfying for the unionists, and for the pragmatists looking for certainty there are still a lot of cans being kicked down the figurative road: "throw the paperwork in the bin" has essentially now become "some businesses in some sectors will be able to ignore some of the paperwork associated with some types of goods for some amount of time".

it's the factual votes that counted, that said the General Election with an 80 seat majority based on a clear Brexit mandate, is very comprehensive, effectively a second referendum, the red wall rejected Labour who have alienated their core voters many Labour areas in the North are strong leave

The factual votes, when examined without the distortion created by the first-past-the-post system, say that the Conservatives received 43.6% of the popular vote. It's not possible to infer from the votes alone how much of this was a Brexit mandate and how much of it was a "not Jeremy Corbyn" mandate, and neither can it be claimed that it was a "clear mandate" for this exact delivery of Brexit - what with the "oven-ready" deal and all that.

 

[class ep-09]

Meanwhile , Brits are barred from EU holidays from 01.01.2021 till COVID cases drops significantly ( that may be , when?) .
So even if a Brit wanted to go to low cases states / regions ( Canaries and some Greek Islands) and come back avoiding quarantine , forget it.

To avoid being accused to be to lefty by brexit fans “ The Sun” broke story followed by The Guardian.


So, as we are not part of EU anymore and FoM ended , we are “ third “ country and there are no exemptions for us.

In the EU, in many, cases you are still allowed to travel for “not essential” reasons including holidaying if you have negative tests .

 

[Ianno87]

How exactly do you arrive at this conclusion? Political involvement aside, the UK's membership in the EU - and particularly the Single Market (of which Mrs Thatcher was one of the most ardent supporters) - allowed British businesses to sell goods and services to the continent with unprecedented ease and allowed British businesses and consumers the same access to European businesses. Several European regulatory agencies had major offices in the UK. British and European universities exchanged students and collaborated on research projects. British security agencies co-operated extensively with their European counterparts. British travellers enjoyed access to public healthcare services on the continent by way of the mutual recognition arrangements. Over a million British citizens have used the Freedom of Movement provisions to live and work in the EU and EEA, and to retire to its sunnier climes, and many many more Britons used those same provisions to take seasonal work in hospitality and all sorts of other sectors. And so on and so on... it's the fact that we did get such use out of membership that's making it so difficult to throw away!

And yes it is true that many of these things can be achieved to some extent or another without SM or EU membership, but that doesn't change the fact that all of the existing agreements have been junked and there's precious little in the offing to replace them right now.

Now when you talk political investment - yeah, that was a joke. And then we piled extra comedy on top of it by returning Charlatan-in-Chief Farage as an MEP time and time again. Such a staunch defender of the interests of the UK that he managed to avoid attending forty-one of the forty-two meetings of the European Parliament's fisheries committee held in the three years up to 2018.

Even still, it was a solid use of our membership - inasmuch as it was so laughably easy for governments of all flavours to blame any and all inconvenient or unpopular policy on the EU. How many people here know, for example, that extending the PRM TSI requirements to all rolling stock and not just new orders was a decision made not in Brussels but in London?


I suggest it's 1) because NI is not a particularly important place or issue to many people on either side and thus was only worthy of attention while it was particularly relevant to a point, and 2) because while this is a very big bit of progress (especially regarding the IMB clauses) it's not really a resolution to the specific issues affecting NI. It still leaves the customs border between NI and GB, which is far from satisfying for the unionists, and for the pragmatists looking for certainty there are still a lot of cans being kicked down the figurative road: "throw the paperwork in the bin" has essentially now become "some businesses in some sectors will be able to ignore some of the paperwork associated with some types of goods for some amount of time".


The factual votes, when examined without the distortion created by the first-past-the-post system, say that the Conservatives received 43.6% of the popular vote. It's not possible to infer from the votes alone how much of this was a Brexit mandate and how much of it was a "not Jeremy Corbyn" mandate, and neither can it be claimed that it was a "clear mandate" for this exact delivery of Brexit - what with the "oven-ready" deal and all that.

The "not Jeremy Corbyn" vote was simply people who didn't vote at all. The total Tory Votes in 2019 only increased by around 100,000 compared to 2017, whereas Labour's total votes dropped by considerably more than that.

The vote result was more an anti-Corbyn mandate than it was a Brexit mandate.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, it shouldn't be beyond the ken of two trading partners, starting off from a similar position to agree a basic goods and produce deal of the sort that exists between both the EU and now the UK and other third party nations.

Yet somehow it is.

Meanwhile , Brits are barred from EU holidays from 01.01.2021 till COVID cases drops significantly ( that may be , when?) .
So even if a Brit wanted to go to low cases states / regions ( Canaries and some Greek Islands) and come back avoiding quarantine , forget it.

To avoid being accused to be to lefty by brexit fans “ The Sun” broke story followed by The Guardian.

Brits could be banned from European holidays from Jan under Covid travel rules

MILLIONS of Brits may be banned from European holidays from January 1 under Covid rules after Britain leaves the EU – even if we get a Brexit deal. The European Union currently has strict pan…

www.thesun.co.uk

Holidaymakers from Great Britain barred from EU after 1 January under Covid rules

European commission indicates Britons will face ban on non-essential travel at end of Brexit transition

www.theguardian.com

So, as we are not part of EU anymore and FoM ended , we are “ third “ country and there are no exemptions for us.

In the EU, in many, cases you are still allowed to travel for “not essential” reasons including holidaying if you have negative tests .

It's hardly a surprise regarding foreign holidays, given that officially most aren't even supposed to go on holiday in Scarborough, let alone Sardinia.

 

[birchesgreen]

What happened to the Prosecco producers and the German car manufacturers? I thought they were going to kick down the door of the talks and demand the UK got what it wanted? Maybe they are caught in traffic?

 

[edwin_m]

Poll are meaningless, it's the actual votes that counted, that said the General Election with an 80 seat majority based on a clear Brexit mandate, is very comprehensive, effectively a second referendum, the red wall rejected Labour who have alienated their core voters many Labour areas in the North are strong leave, yet Labour treated them as deluded fools who don't know what they're voting for, not a very good election strategy.

Project Fear strategy backfired rather spectacularly.

It hadn't occured to Remainers that they could possibly be wrong about the EU, that's how entrenched it is.

If polls are so meaningless, why was the government so resistant to having another referendum to find out the public's view on the deal when the implications of leaving were somewhat clearer? Answer: because they knew they would lose.

As mentioned above, numerous other issues got mixed up in the election, not least that Labour didn't have a coherent alternative on Brexit and the Lib Dems messed up on several levels.

Has it occurred to you that you might be wrong about the EU? As far as I can see you seem to disagree with it as a matter of principle and haven't given any reasons why you think that way. Remainers can cite plenty of benefits of membership and disbenefits of non-membership, not least on this very thread. You can call it Project Fear if you like but that doesn't make it any less true.

 

[birchesgreen]

Project Fear is fast becoming Project Reality, fancy that.

 

[Vespa]

If polls are so meaningless, why was the government so resistant to having another referendum to find out the public's view on the deal when the implications of leaving were somewhat clearer? Answer: because they knew they would lose.

As mentioned above, numerous other issues got mixed up in the election, not least that Labour didn't have a coherent alternative on Brexit and the Lib Dems messed up on several levels.

Has it occurred to you that you might be wrong about the EU? As far as I can see you seem to disagree with it as a matter of principle and haven't given any reasons why you think that way. Remainers can cite plenty of benefits of membership and disbenefits of non-membership, not least on this very thread. You can call it Project Fear if you like but that doesn't make it any less true.

The referendum is a once in a generation event, we're not doing an Ireland referendum.
We have tried to reform from within, vested interest has prevented any improvement.
Our political tradition is different from European political culture.

We should never have joined in (without a referendum) and remained with the EFTA.

 

[class ep-09]

Well, it shouldn't be beyond the ken of two trading partners, starting off from a similar position to agree a basic goods and produce deal of the sort that exists between both the EU and now the UK and other third party nations.

Yet somehow it is.



It's hardly a surprise regarding foreign holidays, given that officially most aren't even supposed to go on holiday in Scarborough, let alone Sardinia.

I agree , but as for Sardinia and other destinations - the decision if UK holidaymaker is allowed to go is in EU’s hands and only theirs.
Even if EU’s holiday makers will be allowed to travel freely to the Med and other destinations , EU will say no to UK’s.

 

[yorksrob]

I agree , but as for Sardinia and other destinations - the decision if UK holidaymaker is allowed to go is in EU’s hands and only theirs.
Even if EU’s holiday makers will be allowed to travel freely to the Med and other destinations , EU will say no to UK’s.

This is true. I doubt much will change until vaccines get rolled out.

 

[najaB]

Isn't it odd that people who are pro-Brexit quickly flit from argument to argument as the holes are poked in each one. Anyway...

The referendum is a once in a generation event, we're not doing an Ireland referendum.

First, it was the Scottish independence referendum that was called a "once in a generation event", not the EU one. And secondly, @edwin_m didn't propose another in/out referendum what he proposed was a referendum on the terms of leaving.

 

[radamfi]

There is not a snowballs chance in hell that the EU are going to budge on the level playing field. Allow the UK do as it pleases and access the single market? That’s the end of the EU. Difficult to grasp the utter stupidity of the UK logic thinking they can strong arm the EU into submission on this issue.

 

[ainsworth74]

There is not a snowballs chance in hell that the EU are going to budge on the level playing field. Allow the UK do as it pleases and access the single market? That’s the end of the EU. Difficult to grasp the utter stupidity of the UK logic thinking they can strong arm the EU into submission on this issue.

But we hold all the cards, the EU will be desperate to do a deal with us! Those people advocating Leave weren't at best giving dodgy information or at worst outright lying were they? Surely not!

 

[najaB]

Difficult to grasp the utter stupidity of the UK logic thinking they can strong arm the EU into submission on this issue.

It's because we have a government lead by a Prime Minister who thinks anything is possible if you believe strongly enough and a cabinet who think "But we're British!" overrides any objection.

 

[Mag_seven]

Meanwhile , Brits are barred from EU holidays from 01.01.2021 till COVID cases drops significantly ( that may be , when?) .
So even if a Brit wanted to go to low cases states / regions ( Canaries and some Greek Islands) and come back avoiding quarantine , forget it.

To avoid being accused to be to lefty by brexit fans “ The Sun” broke story followed by The Guardian.

Brits could be banned from European holidays from Jan under Covid travel rules

MILLIONS of Brits may be banned from European holidays from January 1 under Covid rules after Britain leaves the EU – even if we get a Brexit deal. The European Union currently has strict pan…

www.thesun.co.uk

Holidaymakers from Great Britain barred from EU after 1 January under Covid rules

European commission indicates Britons will face ban on non-essential travel at end of Brexit transition

www.theguardian.com

So, as we are not part of EU anymore and FoM ended , we are “ third “ country and there are no exemptions for us.

In the EU, in many, cases you are still allowed to travel for “not essential” reasons including holidaying if you have negative tests .

Quite liked this bit in the Guardian article:

EU member states can override the European council recommendations in theory, should they wish to

But that can't be correct surely - individual EU states making their own decisions?

 

[ainsworth74]

But that can't be correct surely - individual EU states making their own decisions?

Ah yes a rookie mistake to be sure by the Guardian! They've forgotten that the European council have authoritarian powers over all member states as those members are but puppets of the central EU machine with no individual sovereignty.

 

[Chester1]

Considering the heavy lobbying by the Spanish and Portuguese Government's over the summer to get their countries removed from the UK quarantine list its reasonable to assume they will override the EU decision. Currently we only avoid quarantine from an EU holiday if we visit Azores, Madeira, Canaries and a handful of Greek islands. Such a decision won't change much.

 

[class ep-09]

Considering the heavy lobbying by the Spanish and Portuguese Government's over the summer to get their countries removed from the UK quarantine list its reasonable to assume they will override the EU decision. Currently we only avoid quarantine from an EU holiday if we visit Azores, Madeira, Canaries and a handful of Greek islands. Such a decision won't change much.

Considering that travelling / moving / working was your right, where UK had a say , and now it is only a far away possibility depending on the good will of other countries , it is hard to call it taking back control or progress .

I am writing that as if COVID was not taking place , just to stress the difference between then and now.

 

[Ianno87]

Considering that travelling / moving / working was your right, where UK had a say , and now it is only a far away possibility depending on the good will of other countries , it is hard to call it taking back control or progress .

I am writing that as if COVID was not taking place , just to stress the difference between then and now.

Yep - now completely dependent on the goodwill of the other country. Not progress.

 

[island]

It has emerged this morning that the EU, except Ireland, and also Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland will prohibit leisure travel from 01•JNR•21 for UK residents who are not EU citizens.

This is due to an interaction between the end of the Brexit transition period and the EU Member States’ coordinated approach to travel measures in the EU.

Read more online:

Britons banned from travelling to EU countries from January 1

The UK's coronavirus case rate is too high for Britons to be allowed into the EU when Britain leaves the bloc next month

www.telegraph.co.uk

Holidaymakers from Great Britain barred from EU after 1 January under Covid rules

European commission indicates Britons will face ban on non-essential travel at end of Brexit transition

www.theguardian.com

Also in the Financial Times paper edition and probably many other sites by now.

 

[simonw]

L

What happened to the Prosecco producers and the German car manufacturers? I thought they were going to kick down the door of the talks and demand the UK got what it wanted? Maybe they are caught in traffic?

unfortunately, I believe, the German car makers drank the Prosecco.

 

[Smidster]

Leave the club and no longer get the benefits of membership

We will be treated exactly the same as any other country - Why should that not be the case?

 

[Sad Sprinter]

How exactly do you arrive at this conclusion? Political involvement aside, the UK's membership in the EU - and particularly the Single Market (of which Mrs Thatcher was one of the most ardent supporters) - allowed British businesses to sell goods and services to the continent with unprecedented ease and allowed British businesses and consumers the same access to European businesses. Several European regulatory agencies had major offices in the UK. British and European universities exchanged students and collaborated on research projects. British security agencies co-operated extensively with their European counterparts. British travellers enjoyed access to public healthcare services on the continent by way of the mutual recognition arrangements. Over a million British citizens have used the Freedom of Movement provisions to live and work in the EU and EEA, and to retire to its sunnier climes, and many many more Britons used those same provisions to take seasonal work in hospitality and all sorts of other sectors. And so on and so on... it's the fact that we did get such use out of membership that's making it so difficult to throw away!

And yes it is true that many of these things can be achieved to some extent or another without SM or EU membership, but that doesn't change the fact that all of the existing agreements have been junked and there's precious little in the offing to replace them right now.

Now when you talk political investment - yeah, that was a joke. And then we piled extra comedy on top of it by returning Charlatan-in-Chief Farage as an MEP time and time again. Such a staunch defender of the interests of the UK that he managed to avoid attending forty-one of the forty-two meetings of the European Parliament's fisheries committee held in the three years up to 2018.

Margaret Thatcher allegedly later regretted the Single Market. I think she saw it as nothing more but a free trading area, but realised it "meant something" to the Europeans as a path to something much grander. Needless to say, Britain has complained for decades about the regulations needed to make the single market work. The very fact that Britain is pulling out of the single market to avoid ECJ jurisdiction shows that strength of the feeling of principle over practice. Now yes, maybe that would change once we actually leave. But the old fears of "we don't know where the EU would end up" would most likely see us keep out of the SM in another referendum.

That's the problem, the legal supremacy principle, the extreme reluctance to pursue deeper integration in Europe (even just the possibility of deeper integration) and the lack of past referenda at the signing of various treaties probably means that most Brexiteers would rather have the gamble of losing all that you mentioned for the peace of mind that they don't have to "worry" about Europe in the back of their minds.

At the end of the day, I'm not sure that Brexiteers outside of London/uni towns really care about those things. If you went to Stoke on Trent and asked them "would you rather see the onshore of British industry with a no-deal Brexit or keep EU membership and let London have a few nice EU agency offices?" I think I know which one they would pick. Healthcare on the continent, Univeristy research, living and working in the EU probably means sod all to the majority of Brexiteers considering many of them will never get the chance (or want to) live or work (or love-cringe) in the EU.

Farage is one example, but what about John Major? Who chose to destroy his party to pass legislation to implement the Maastricht Treaty when several other countries put them to referenda? Blair and Brown didn't even want to touch Europe because they knew it would be a suicide mission for New Labour, and Brown could have passed a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty when polls indicated 80% of the public at the time wanted one. Then there's Cameron and Osbourne, who were shamfully ignorant of how the country felt outside of London that they did not see the dangers of messing around with an in/out referendum. Even Nick Clegg supported one in 2008!

 

[Yew]

I don't remember Farrage shouting about holidays to France being banned...