Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 10 minutes ago, peterms said: People were also told that we would stay in the single market, and that the health service would get big extra investment if we left. Nick Clegg tried to peddle this 'post truth politics' about the single market and got demolished. Long video but the rebuttal to the claim is from approx 5:45-6:45 when the major players for leave and remain all stated a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 9 minutes ago, blandy said: Apologies. I think however you (or diplomats or negotiators) word it, threatening (even ever so gently) our neighbours and friends with actions which would make them (and us) less safe is both utterly unacceptable and likely to harden rather than soften attitudes in negotiations. Well if they make a serious attempt to damage our economic security then I think we've got to be ready to play rough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 5 minutes ago, Awol said: Well if they make a serious attempt to damage our economic security then I think we've got to be ready to play rough. Play rough? The UK is an Island. The E.U. has zero fundamental need for any of the security etc. that the U.K. can provide... unless, you lot will watch the western flank from a sneaky US attack? An aggressive UK position is simply untenable; hopefully, calmer heads will prevail. All these discussions are somewhat moot as the continent is on lockdown until the result of the Italian referendum comes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 2 minutes ago, villakram said: Play rough? The UK is an Island. The E.U. has zero fundamental need for any of the security etc. that the U.K. can provide... unless, you lot will watch the western flank from a sneaky US attack? An aggressive UK position is simply untenable; hopefully, calmer heads will prevail. All these discussions are somewhat moot as the continent is on lockdown until the result of the Italian referendum comes in. UK is roughly equal with France as the two largest owners of defence capability in Europe. If you think that means nothing you're wrong. In terms of intelligence (especially SIGINT), counter terrorism & policing expertise the UK is peerless in Europe. I'm not at all suggesting other nations bring nothing to the table but again this is not a small consideration. Far from being aggressive it's a UK retrenching away from pan-European defence that would be damaging to Europe. We won't compromise core NATO business because it's not fundamentally in our own security interests (as Blandy has noted), but there are peripheral EU things we could pull away from that would leave substantial capability gaps for other ill equipped EU nations to fill. Agree with you on the Italian referendum though and imo he's certain to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 29 minutes ago, Awol said: Nick Clegg tried to peddle this 'post truth politics' about the single market and got demolished. Long video but the rebuttal to the claim is from approx 5:45-6:45 when the major players for leave and remain all stated a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. That's the first time I've ever been personally linked to anything involving Nick Clegg. I feel somehow...soiled, violated...I think I need a safe space. I see your compilation, and I raise you this. Quote There’s been much talk since the EU referendum of Brexiters backpedalling on promises they gave voters: £350m a week for the NHS, a points-based immigration system, that the economy wouldn’t tank after the vote. Now campaign group ‘Open Britain’ are pointing out the sudden change some architects of the ‘Leave’ operation have performed on what Brexit means for our place in the Single Market. First Tory MEP Daniel Hannan was skewered on the subject by Newsnight’s Evan Davies. But now he, Nigel Farage and head of Vote Leave, Matthew Elliot, have been spliced together in one 90-second clip decrying a place for post-Brexit Britain outside the Single Market, the system that means countries can trade without tariffs based on agreements on things like immigration. Check the video. Fact is, different and contradictory things were promised during the campaign. You can't pick one set of quotes and say that was the definitive information offered. It just wasn't. Partly because the players themselves had no idea of what would be possible; they were winging it. If you think that is a good basis for making such a decision, good luck - I eould disagree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 2 minutes ago, peterms said: That's the first time I've ever been personally linked to anything involving Nick Clegg. I feel somehow...soiled, violated...I think I need a safe space. I see your compilation, and I raise you this. Check the video. Fact is, different and contradictory things were promised during the campaign. You can't pick one set of quotes and say that was the definitive information offered. It just wasn't. Partly because the players themselves had no idea of what would be possible; they were winging it. If you think that is a good basis for making such a decision, good luck - I eould disagree. Ah yes, the Open Britain video. Please watch Andrew Neil take that Matthew McGrory and his video apart on the Sunday Politics - I thought blood sports were banned these days?! Another glorious example of post truth politics by this cheeky Remain chappie. I'm still convinced most people made the best informed decision they could. The attempt to run a second referendum is simply following the EU model - if you vote wrongly the first time you must vote again until you get it right. **** that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 What a tosser that Neil is, by the way. Anyway, try this. Quote The single market The campaign claim: Some on the Leave side suggested the UK does not need preferential access to the single market. The current claim: The UK should get preferential access to the single market but will not have to accept freedom of movement to get it. Reality Check verdict: The position has shifted from claims the UK could trade under World Trade Organisation rules to one which suggests the UK will continue to have preferential access to the single market, but at the same time having some control over immigration levels. During the campaign, some Leave campaigners said that the UK outside of the EU would not need preferential access to the single market and would just trade under World Trade Organization rules. This was the basis of research by Economists for Brexit, who said the UK should unilaterally remove all tariffs on imports. But writing in the Telegraph on Monday, Boris Johnson quoted German employers' organisation the BDI as saying there would continue to be free trade and access to the single market. The BDI later denied this. If the UK wanted to retain preferential access to the single market, many European politicians say it would have to continue to accept freedom of movement. Boris Johnson said that British people would continue to be able to live, work and study in the EU, while at the same time the UK would be able to introduce a points-based system to control migration. Leader of the House of Commons Chris Grayling said that we would be able to have a free trade agreement with the EU while at the same time controlling the flow of people coming into the country. The UK can certainly aim to secure such a deal. But no country so far has managed a deal that allows full preferential access to the single market without having to accept freedom of movement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 22, 2016 Moderator Share Posted November 22, 2016 What I find utterly staggering, utterly staggering is the prevailing notion that aside from our exit the EU will sail merrily on. All discussions in relation A50 and our negotiated exit seem to take this as a given. It's as if the totally shock people felt at our leave vote and the U.S. vote was so unpalatable they've decided they won't be repeated. Yet there is plenty to suggest some pretty big changes are coming in domestic politics across Europe. Those domestic political changes could easily result in more referendums in EU membership. The landscape could look very different if suddenly we aren't the only ones leaving and wanting to have the best of both worlds. Some think the EU are in the driving seat but the rug may yet be pulled from under those in Brussels. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Being in the single market means retaining the customs union, means not being able to do our own trade deals beyond the protectionist block - I think Yanis Varoufakis' analogy with a cartel is apt. A major part of the leave campaign was about doing our own trade deals with large &/or growth economies that the EU has no existing deals with. I don't buy this notion people didn't understand the two were mutually exclusive. On the other side of the coin we are still waiting for the economic collapse, emergency budget, mass unemployment and WW3 that would follow (and some including the Treasury said immediately) a Remain loss. While both sides were disingenuous I think Remain won the alarmist BS accolade by a country mile. As for Andrew Neil he's one of the very few broadcast journalists today who forensically dices up his interviewees. Brilliant at his job imo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 5 minutes ago, TrentVilla said: What I find utterly staggering, utterly staggering is the prevailing notion that aside from our exit the EU will sail merrily on. All discussions in relation A50 and our negotiated exit seem to take this as a given. Have a "this" Europe thinks it has to play hard ball to survive , to discourage others from leaving .. it actually needs to do the opposite to survive 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 6 minutes ago, Awol said: As for Andrew Neil he's one of the very few broadcast journalists today who forensically dices up his interviewees. Brilliant at his job imo. Agree , his auto-cue reading of trying to be funny at the beginning of this week doesn't really suit him but once you get onto the serious political chat he knows his stuff and there's nobody better out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 8 minutes ago, Awol said: A major part of the leave campaign was about doing our own trade deals with large &/or growth economies that the EU has no existing deals with. I don't buy this notion people didn't understand the two were mutually exclusive. The cabinet minister with the responsibility for negotiating our exit from the EU didn't know that we weren't able to arrange individual trade deals with Germany, France, Italy and Poland after a vote to leave. Given that the person who is somehow in charge of this stupidity didn't know how trade negotiations work, what makes you think that "people" did? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, TrentVilla said: What I find utterly staggering, utterly staggering is the prevailing notion that aside from our exit the EU will sail merrily on. All discussions in relation A50 and our negotiated exit seem to take this as a given. I don't think anyone in a position of responsibility thinks the EU is sailing on. The prevailing mood seems to be one of existential threat. Not just because of Brexit, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 22, 2016 Moderator Share Posted November 22, 2016 6 minutes ago, peterms said: I don't think anyone in a position of responsibility thinks the EU is sailing on. The prevailing mood seems to be one of existential threat. Not just because of Brexit, of course. It was a comment more in regards those commenting (professionally) upon events than those in danger of going down with the ship. I do though think there is an arrogance amongst some in Brussels which makes them incapable of realising the wind of change could turn quickly in their direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 2 hours ago, Awol said: Well worth 5 mins - imo. I've watched that and am now 20 minutes in to his 'Global Trumpism' lecture at the Watson Institute at Brown which so far is pretty interesting (especially liked the Kierkegaard bit). Ta. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Awol said: UK is roughly equal with France as the two largest owners of defence capability in Europe. If you think that means nothing you're wrong. In terms of intelligence (especially SIGINT), counter terrorism & policing expertise the UK is peerless in Europe. I'm not at all suggesting other nations bring nothing to the table but again this is not a small consideration. Far from being aggressive it's a UK retrenching away from pan-European defence that would be damaging to Europe. We won't compromise core NATO business because it's not fundamentally in our own security interests (as Blandy has noted), but there are peripheral EU things we could pull away from that would leave substantial capability gaps for other ill equipped EU nations to fill. Agree with you on the Italian referendum though and imo he's certain to lose. Strawmen somewhat. What great threat does the EU require the UK for? Those Iranian oilfields are awful menacing I suppose. They will be dealt with as was that bad bad man in Libya and those awful awful Syrians (all of them, as we've been very specific in facilitating pretty much the entire populations suffering). Why would it be bad for Europe if England was no longer working from the inside trying to ensure the continent remained fragmented to enhance it's own strategic interests? And it's great strategic ally the US. If one of those all powerful gods that many people take seriously came along tomorrow and disappeared England, are you suggesting that Europe would fall apart due to all the threats that it is protected from? Those Russians are dying to invade and take over the entire continent right? And the Chinese... they'll want to better the legacy of the Khans. The millennial anniversary is approaching I guess. Praise be to Lizy and her brave & mighty men! If the UK (military defence clowns... Brits are generally a nice bunch) and it's NATO nonsense was booted out of the continent then that would not be some huge catastrophe for poor old vulnerable Europe. Edited November 22, 2016 by villakram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 22 minutes ago, Awol said: Being in the single market means retaining the customs union, means not being able to do our own trade deals beyond the protectionist block - I think Yanis Varoufakis' analogy with a cartel is apt. It's worse than that. In a cartel, firms can do what they want beyond the narrow limits of the agreement about corrupt bidding. This is more like a franchise, or a gang; all your actions are circumscribed by the group to which you have pledged allegiance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 5 minutes ago, ml1dch said: The cabinet minister with the responsibility for negotiating our exit from the EU didn't know that we weren't able to arrange individual trade deals with Germany, France, Italy and Poland after a vote to leave. Given that the person who is somehow in charge of this stupidity didn't know how trade negotiations work, what makes you think that "people" did? David Davies? Really?! On the point about "people" nearly everyone I know from widely differing backgrounds voted to leave. From the conversations I either had with them or listened to they knew what leaving meant, i.e. a baseline of what Remain media subsequently labelled "hard Brexit" with whatever consecessions we could negotiate on top. On social media it was the same. I believe the cry of "they know not what they do" comes mainly from people trying to rationalise the fact a majority of voters disagreed with their view. That's still happening on the broadcast and print media on a daily basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 On balance, I think leaving is best. But absolutely not on this basis of utter ignorance about what it means, and powerlessness to influence our future relations with the EU and its constituent natiobs. That is not a rational act, just a savage kicking out at god only knows what. Madness. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Awol said: David Davies? Really?! On the point about "people" nearly everyone I know from widely differing backgrounds voted to leave. From the conversations I either had with them or listened to they knew what leaving meant, i.e. a baseline of what Remain media subsequently labelled "hard Brexit" with whatever consecessions we could negotiate on top. On social media it was the same. I believe the cry of "they know not what they do" comes mainly from people trying to rationalise the fact a majority of voters disagreed with their view. That's still happening on the broadcast and print media on a daily basis. I'm not sure what the "Really?!" refers to. Whether you're questioning my assertion that he has that responsibility or whether he broadcast those views back in May. As for "nearly everyone I know..." I guess it goes to show the benefit of not living in a bubble of shared opinion. Edited November 22, 2016 by ml1dch errant apostrophe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts