Brexit bleakness

(Paul Flinders) #1

So, the economy will crash and burn but that’s OK because it will shake the lazy snowflake generation out of their complacency.


(Martin Cooper) #2


He is ‘happy’ to go through this, just to shake up the youngsters, while everyone else gets poorer (apart from the rich) :frowning:

Britexiters remind me of fanatical religious nuts, who will not see the logical path, even though the experts are saying something else.


(Timothy Cole) #3

The only party to have the balls to reverse Brexit are the LibDems but no one votes for them, therefore the majority of the UK voting public must either want Brexit OR just can’t be bothered to stop it.

(Paul Flinders) #4

Even the Liberal Democrats have not gone as far as to say that they will reverse Brexit - only that will offer a second referendum. Even if such a thing were on the cards no-one knows how an attempt to halt proceedings would pan out.

However unless something happens to topple the government neither the Labour party nor the Lib Dems are going to get chance to do anything about Brexit until we are out of the EU.

The Tories won’t reverse the process, won’t negotiate a “soft” Brexit and it looks increasingly likely that they will fail even to negotiate a “hard” Brexit leaving us with no agreement come March 2019.

(Timothy Cole) #5

There is no such thing as a ‘soft Brexit’, you’re either in the EU or you’re not. Labour’s position is exactly the same as the Tories despite all the bluster from Corbyn and co.

(David Martin) #6

You need to look at the facts beyond your obvious bias.

(Timothy Cole) #7

Bias against what or whom?

(Tony PERLA) #8

Quite wrong, there will be a “hard Brexit”, which is necessary to show other EU countries the folly of leaving . . .

(Anna Watson) #9

There will be a hard Brexit because the UK seems unable to grasp that the EU doesn’t do U turns, therefore the rules Davis agreed to respect regarding the sequencing of negotiations, will have to be respected if they ever want to get to phase 2. It’s no good agreeing to abide by set in stone rules and then whinging that there is no flexibility.

(Jane Williamson) #10

Martin, would you ever expect nuts of any kind to see a logical path?

(Jane Williamson) #11

Wrong. I voted Lib Dem! A change from Tory.

(Jane Williamson) #12

Anna, It is not just David Davis avoiding phase 2.
Theresa May is scared stiff of losing the votes of the DUP if she cannot negotiate an open border with tge Irish Republic.

(Timothy Cole) #13

Oh you were the one.

(Anna Watson) #14

No I’m not blaming DD. I am just saying, same as you, that the UK is scared 5h1less of doing what it takes to wrap up phase 1, ie facing up to the money issue and the Irish border issue, and also the ECJ issue. But the EU knows they have to be pinned down now because if trade talks start they will have no incentive to ever resolved these issues if they can possibly weasel out.

(Paul Flinders) #15

I am indeed biased - I think that the whole thing has been a fiasco from start to finish and will stifle much needed debate about how the EU is structured. But I do wonder what facts it is that I am supposed to wake up and sniff along with the fresh coffee?

The meme that the EU is “punishing” us persists. In fact we seem to be doing a very adequate job of doing that ourselves. I am not clear that if the EU insists that if we wish access to the EEA we must play by the rules of the EEA just like anyone else is punishing us - except that we are under the illusion that we somehow deserve special privilege and are in a huff because we are not getting it. “I say old chap, don’tcha know we’re British” does not cut it any more.

Soft vs hard Brexit are broadly accepted terms to describe Brexit either with or without a deal to access the EEA on roughly equal terms to that which we enjoy at present. This is separate from our membership of the EU so it is certainly possible to have a “Soft Brexit” in theory.

However in practical terms I think it is unlikely. My personal view is that leaving the EU while remaining a member of the EEA is, frankly, a bit daft. It would not save us much money, nor excuse us from the “4 freedoms”, nor remove us from the influence of EU legislation, nor allow us to freely associate with other nations for trade. It would, however, remove our influence upon the regulations which affect us - so arguably it is the worst of all possible worlds with respect to self determination.

It is also politically unacceptable. Partly for the reasons above and partly because May is now too weak to ignore the “hard Brexit” support within the party, or pressure from the more extreme of the leave crowd outside the party.

So, “Hard” Brexit is a reality, however because of the incompetence and intransigence of our negotiating team it looks more like we will be headed for “kamikaze Brexit” - i.e exit with no deal. Unfortunately I think that Peter North is broadly correct in his assessment of what the future holds, unlike him I do not for a moment think that it is acceptable. His suggestion that somehow today’s youth need to be shaken from their complacency is execrable. It seems only a hair off the suggestion that war is good for us all as it is the crucible in which heroes are forged so why not arrange for someone to invade Poland again so we can all have a jolly nice European fight just like in the old days.

It is utterly arrogant of my generation (and those a little older than I am) to think that we have a right to tell young adults how to run their lives - they will be getting on just fine after we are dead and gone. Society changes, fashion changes but heroes are still forged whatever the age.

Back in the here and now we are stuck with Brexit and stuck with hard Brexit. If we are very lucky we will negotiate a deal - c.f CETA and claw our way back to where we are now economically in 10-15 years. We will find that we have to accept EU standards to do so and somehow square the circle of also having to accept whatever is dictated by trade agreements with the US and China - what then of sovereignty? We will probably continue to have high levels of immigration as we lack the political will or ability to force, cajole or train the benefit classes into work. We will need someone who is not afraid of a hard day’s graft. What then of border control? It will cost us billions, what then of £350million a week saved?

(David Martin) #16

I just wish that Britain had a government that would be prepared to work using economic data to ensure that they steer the country in the direction that will offer it its strongest future. This idea that the will of the people, which in fact is the will of 52% of the misinformed people who voted in a non binding referendum, should be followed is political weakness of the highest order. The basic facts point to the fact that Britain is and will remain stronger within a union of its closest neighbours and best trading partners. The same basics point to the fact that every other country that is worth trading with is already tied up in their own , similar, trading groups and even those who wished to hold out a helping hand would be restricted from doing so. We are living in the world markets of the C20th when a small, independent country cannot excel on the worldwide stage not the C15th when the exploits of a few could allow countries like Britain, Holland and Portugal to punch well beyond their weight.

(Anna Watson) #17

All the pointers are that it was the will of the people to remove the pay cap from NHS workers et al, but on her one brave TV appearance Mrs May explained to the NHS worker who had had the courage to tell a roomful of people that she was working hard but not earning enough to live on decently (what must that do for a person’s self respect) that she would just have to put up and shut up because it would be bad for the country’s economy to allow her to earn a living wage.
And when it comes to Brexit, the country’s economy can go hang.

(Paul Flinders) #18

It’s not even the will of the people - turnout was 72% so it turns out to be the will of just over 37% of the people.

(David Martin) #19

Isn’t that exactly what I wrote, 52% of the people who voted?

(Paul Flinders) #20

It was - I was just underlining the fact that it is stretching it a bit to say that it is the “will of the people” which is a phrase repeated ad nauseam by (especially) Tory politicians.