Brexit View

[Alan Medic]

https://www.byline.com/column/67/article/2040

Intersting read of possible life here, post Brexit. It's scary.

[malumbu]

Terry Christian and other celebs aint doing to the cause any good. No matter how much the posturing over hard brexit, and the 'the British public has decided". Now I can rant on about the bunch of lying winkers. But I am not on Question Time.

[JohnL]

The EU has said NI will be in the single market.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/09/northern-ireland-will-stay-in-single-market-after-brexit-eu-says

That will really really annoy the DUP - unless the whole of the UK does the same.

[Alan Medic]

Good and good. UK government agreed to the former in effect to get to phase 2 of the talks. Now they can deal with the fallout with the DUP.

[malumbu]

What's Terry Christian got to say?

[Blah Blah]

Agreed on the DUP and prior agreements.

Also worrying noises from Japan that they will relocate all car plants if the UK does not have access to the single market (I have been warning of that since the beginning and we all know that Nissan was promised access to the single market to get them to stay). I think there is real threat behind this especially because of the trade deal Japan has now agreed with the EU.

So all in all, I can not see how the government can survive any deal that removes access to the single market and has no form of customs union - or a free trade deal at least, in relation to the car industry.

On Terry Christian, we have seen week after week, audiences filled with leave supporters almost aggressive in tone, who dismiss any attempt to engage them with the practical detail of leaving, yet expect remain supporters to accept their unsubstantiated views of 'everything will just be better'. Christian was standing up to that, and it was good to see someone on a panel do so. This is precisely why many have the view that leave supporters per se, have little understanding of the complexity of this. They don't like any scrutiny of what they actually understand.

[JohnL]

Nissan has very strong links to Renault who are owned by the French government

Can't see them being in Sunderland in 5 years or so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault%E2%80%93Nissan%E2%80%93Mitsubishi_Alliance

[poch]

I can't quite get my head around the fact that the numbers (ie Gov's own scary forecasts) aren't seeming to cut through to the Leavers in the Question Time audiences. Last week one lady said something along the lines of, 'when are Remainers going to understand that for people who voted for Brexit the economy is a secondary issue?'

Think those of a Remain / soft Brexit bent could be doing a better job of explaining the actual day-to-day reality of what a 15% downturn in growth for a place like Darlington would mean...

[Blah Blah]

But those people don't want to listen to any kind of reasonable analysis. It is partly the problem of goldfish bowl understanding of impact. Thinkgs like GDP and growth go over the heads of a lot of people who only measure an economy by how well they personally are doing. And of course, throughout history, the establishment have made a good job of scapegoating foreigners whenever economic decline sets it. Both world wars were preceeded by a period of severe economic decline and a rise of nationalism. If we are going to cut through the leave supporter lack of reason, we have to try and understand why they are so hell bent on risking the economy for eradication of foreign influence.

[poch]

Agree blah blah. But still feel those in favour of a soft Brexit could be presenting better, simpler arguments. The fact that the UK has gone from the top of the G7 table to the bottom since Brexit is really significant (not a forecast - an indictment of where we are) but, perhaps, as you say, the language - G7, GDP etc - is a little too abstract. But there will be ways of explaining those facts simply. Remainers should be presenting more relevant arguments (cost of going on your summer holiday; cost of weekly shop). And perhaps they should also be explaining that trade deals with India will come with a caveat ie more visas for skilled Indians who want to come to the UK. Maybe that type of info is more likely to cut through?

[Loz]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But those people don't want to listen to any kind of reasonable analysis. It is partly the problem

> of goldfish bowl understanding of impact. Thinkgs

> If we are going to cut through the leave supporter lack of reason, we

> have to try and understand why they are so hell bent on risking the economy for eradication of

> foreign influence.

Perhaps pointing out that the very people who voted for Brexit will be the ones to suffer? Because thinking that more jobs will be available at, say, the Sunderland plant when Brexit forces foreign workers to leave is fairly pointless if the plant goes as well. 7000-14000 job losses would be devastating for the region.

But, as the notable statistic that non-EU immigration was higher than EU immigration was completely ignored in the run up to the vite, I really don't think any of it will sinking in until it actually happens. Had May failed to convince Nissan to temporarily stay following the referendum, I think the backlash may have begun.

But, since the Nissan chief was back in Downing St this week, there is still a lot of uncertainty.

[Blah Blah]

Agree with both of you.

We need to break down the economic language into relevant day-to-day costs of living.

I agree with you Loz in that it seems it doesn't matter how much we point out that the people most likely to suffer are places like Cornwall and the North East, until it happens, they won't get it. And who will they blame then?

The Nissan thing is significant. It is blatently clear that they were promised continued access to the single market and it is also clear there is a chance the government won't deliver that. There are still Tory hard brexiters dismissing any idea that we will lose the Japanese and German car manufacturing sector, because we import so many cars from Germany that the EU will do a free trade deal on that. But in all of this, they keep forgetting that all EU members are bound by a set of rules on trade and if we are able to leave and get our cake and eat it, there is nothing to stop other EU members doing the same. This is why the EU will self preserve, even if it contracts some of their major exports to us. Brits will still buy BMW, they will just be paying tariffs on top. The Japanese however, do not have to put up with tariffs on most of the cars we export to the EU, they can just move the plants, and we will pay tariffs on those cars if we want them too.

What angers me most is the political self preservation going on in government. May is completely caught in a bear trap (of her own making), too afraid to put her foot down on people like Bojo and Rees Mogg for fear of a leadership challenge. I really do think that in her mind, she believes she can remain leader of the Tory party into the next election. The truth is that the Tory party has never been able to resolve its split on Europe and there is no reason to think they can do so now. And while they try to figure that out, the clock is ticking and the focus is not where it should be.

[JohnL]

These letters from "the real 48"

just doesn't ring true to me. The word "real" scares me a bit and hope whoever wrote them is identified.

[pato]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/01/customs-union-brexit-trade-turkey

[EDOldie]

Hmmm is that the same Miriam Gonzalez Durantez that's married to Nick Clegg?

[rendelharris]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hmmm is that the same Miriam Gonzalez Durantez

> that's married to Nick Clegg?

It's the extremely highly qualified and very highly regarded expert in EU Law and former EU trade negotiator Miriam Gonzalez Durantez. She does also happen to be married to Nick Clegg, but if you're implying she would toe his line - I know people who know them both and I'm pretty sure, from what I'm told, that's not the case!

[EDOldie]

Lady Clegg is hardly the person on the Clapham omnibus that one might expect an unbiased opinion from. There's so much rubbish being talked on both sides I'm fed up to the back teeth with the whole thing. It's a great shame that it's happened but there it is.

[JoeLeg]

I don?t really understand why anyone who is seen to be challenging Brexit (in any way) is automatically viewed with suspicion.

Lady Clegg, or John Major for that matter, may indeed be biased. Does that make them automatically wrong? And, to be fair, does it make Gove or Davis automatically wrong when they write their vision for the future of the UL?

Surely by this point we need - sorry Gove - as many experts as we can get, to give us as much information as we can? Why are we dismissing people purely because of how the voted? Are we saying only people who don?t care either way are allowed to inform the debate, that everyone else is tainted?

[EDOldie]

Both sides should be viewed with suspicion they are as bad as each other. People pretend that they are putting forward an unbiased view of the arguments for and against customs unions and the single market but it is simply not the case on either side. The question on the ballot paper was "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" and we all know what the answer was. I might not like it but that isn't the point. God, I suppose I'll end up the most hated person on the EDF?

[rendelharris]

Not by me, I assure you, I see where you're coming from. But you encapsulate the problem, the referendum asked a bald question without any consideration for the nuances such as staying in a customs union, having a hard border across Ireland, etc. It's always being referred to as a divorce - well how many divorces do you see where the parties are asked "Do you want to get a divorce? Yes? Right that's it - no you can't discuss who gets the house or how you share the children, you said yes." That's why we need the debate (and in my opinion a vote on the final deal).

[JoeLeg]

Nor by me either ED! But I?m perpetually confused by (mostly Leave)voters who are now vociferously arguing their version of what we should do next, and seem unable to listen to any informed opinion that does not precisely dovetail with their view, regardless of who is speaking.

Now surely is the time for as much debate as possible, but it?s going to be impossible to find an unbiased view.

[JohnL]

Both sides are now using bad language (Nadine Dorries called John Major a traitor today). There's a tendency for the sides to copy each others language and add a bit.

[JohnL]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Both sides should be viewed with suspicion they

> are as bad as each other. People pretend that they

> are putting forward an unbiased view of the

> arguments for and against customs unions and the

> single market but it is simply not the case on

> either side. The question on the ballot paper was

> "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the

> European Union or leave the European Union?" and

> we all know what the answer was. I might not like

> it but that isn't the point. God, I suppose I'll

> end up the most hated person on the EDF?

I've got to repeat Mr Major even though he's very patermalistic

The welfare of the people takes precedence over the will of the people.

Paternalistic as h*ll but he has a point.

[vito]

EDOldie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Both sides should be viewed with suspicion they

> are as bad as each other. People pretend that they

> are putting forward an unbiased view of the

> arguments for and against customs unions and the

> single market but it is simply not the case on

> either side. The question on the ballot paper was

> "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the

> European Union or leave the European Union?" and

> we all know what the answer was. I might not like

> it but that isn't the point. God, I suppose I'll

> end up the most hated person on the EDF?

Referendum on this matter is already a silly thing to ask regular people. Cameron was well paid to take those decision with his governement. I did not study at Oxford Uni if He (cameron and all MP) doesn t know how can i know?...otherwise it becomes a lottery..

The info given to us now should have be given before referendum. we went for a referendum without having (and still now) any idea about the consequences.

We of course need to take in consideration that 52% of the people wanted to leave but we need not to forget also 48% don t want to. Referendum is consultative, it s not a law in itself. the outcome should be a solution that keeps the whole UK happy and unhappy at the same time.

All united in one solution and not divided. In a country or family it is not that 3 people decide for 5. It s about finding a solution that keeps all 5 of us moderately happy.

You not gonna unite a country if you need to chose one side or the other.

PM, seen the referendum result, should have found a solution to keep the country happy and united. If she was able..

Also I personally don t care about Brexit but as the leavers keep hanging on that +2% as they say "it s the will of the people" what is the problem to have another referendum or more than one eventually?? I say another referendum will reflect the will of the people way better as we had time and some more info to reflect on that!!.....if it was about the will of the ppl. If it is about grasping some power etc than we don t need another referendum.

If someone i care is about to do something risky let s say...i ll asks again "are you sure?" before he jumps off

If You care about the will of the people being respected You should not be worried about asking the question again to make sure we know where we going..

It will be a shame for You if for instance you don t want another referendum or any form or consultation direct or indirect cause You know you won it by nearly nothing, with no info and in the heat of the moment. That s not about the will of the ppl that s about "forcing a situation"..and that creates friction and division.

Regarding Clegg s wife article it s a fact what she is saying. it s not an opinion. think those things can be easily verified. Also of course she is an expert in the sector and her opinion matters; If Anything I d say more than someone else opinion. Someone that has spent all referendum campaign telling me how disastrous brexit can be and now spending the same amount of time telling me how good brexit can be for the country. I ll tent to believe more someone that doesn t change her mind drastically every time she s asked to do so. If that someone is not even an expert, never was voted and when asked to be voted lost even sits than.... i ll say "Lady Clegg" opinion is respectful enough!

I don t like europe, i did not want it in the first place (although i thought it was necessary) but if we want to respect the will of the people what s the problem asking (directly or not directly) again?

I did not like europe and i did not want it in the first place..

Although I m a remainer but first of all I want the will of the people to be respected even if it was opposite of mine!!

...As unfortunately we have a PM minister that cannot find a solution (also seen the referendum results) that unites all country rather than just taking any part on this.

..As possibly more info should have be given before referendum

..As more studies should have been done before art 50 (what was the rush there?? specially if you don t know what you doing..)

..As all researches are saying that with more time and more info lots of ppl have changed their mind on the referendum vote

..As You cannot think to bring the whole UK anywhere important with a +2% and the DUP (paid) only on your side

..As Scotland london and N Ireland don t want absolutely leave..

....considering all of this ..what s the problem of asking directly or inderectly again before jumping off the cliff???

I only wish we had a better PM someone able to read the referendum and find a solution for us all rather than taking part creating division. In this sense I think Brexit could also have been an opportunity for all of us but we ll end up losing on both sides of brexit..

I wish we had a PM that after referendum was able to read the outcome. I wish PM had looked very very carefully into the problem before art50! I wish PM would discuss in parliament about pro and cons of Brexit and was able to find TOGETHER a solution to unify the country and have a clear idea on how to get out of europe with a vision once we had agreed to leave with referendum. In this sense brexit could have been also an opportunity for ll of us, all the existing businesses and the new ones to come and for the People of UK! Shame we have what we have..not for brexit (although I am a strong remainer)

We needed a Statesman to make the brexit decision an opportunity but we found some ..scramble eggs

That s the real problem! and while we fight over brexit or not brexit we missing the real problem.

[malumbu]

What happened to that nice Mr Farage? I don't see him around the pubs of Westminster any more. Perhaps he is spending more time with his family.