Brexit

[PaulCP]

Totally unprofessional and clear proof that the “unelected EU mafia” does indeed exist.

Also a comment which could well cost the EU £39billion, I hope the rest of the EU remember who to blame for the effect on their future economies of either having to contribute more or reduce their take, depending on where each country sit in the financial chain

[Barrykearley]

Ahh the EU is a peace project.....hmm the irony not lost on the comments Tusk made there.

absolutely not surprised at his attitude - the house of cards is going to fall 

[pete]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1364202060410523&id=365076723656400

[C8RKH]

Interesting piece on Radio 4 the other night. They were in a remain voting area and asking about the extension, new vote whatever. A large number of even remainers were saying look, we had a vote, we decided to leave, why haven't we done it yet and can we just get on with leaving so we can get on with the rest of our lives.

I think Cable and the like are totally deluded if they think a rerun of the vote will mean remin wins. Even that muppet Corbyn thinks it which is why he won;t come out and support it. People have had enough and just want to now move on. politicians please take note.

[Barrykearley]

@C8RKH I’m absolutely convinced if the politicians and civil service thought for one minute they would get a remain result the second time round - we would already have had the referendum. We need this whole shit fest concluded.

 

Roll on April and the new dawn

[Andyww]

But I am sure remain would be the outcome of another vote unfortunately. The outrageous lies such as prospects of empty shelves, food and medicine shortages etc would sway a lot of people who dont bother to check facts and simply believe everything they are told.

Its interesting that the "news" that imports will be unaffected at ports and will be waved through has been largely unreported. This is not news at all and is something that would obviously happen from the start.

 

[Barrykearley]

Suggest you change your news channel if you wish to see some interesting news items

try RT news - you get to see Paris on fire every weekend

[C8RKH]

@Andyww I agree the news is one sided and full of lies, but then the remainers will just justify it by saying leave lied at the start anyway.

The whole bloody thing is just a mess and ALL of our politicians need to bow their heads in shame that after 2 years we are where we are. They should all be sacked for incompetence to be honest.

[PaulCP]

Can’t help thinking that Corbyn’s letter yesterday evening, outlining what is required for Labour to get behind any deal, is nothing more that a well timed attempt at further muddying the waters in the hope that he can still force a general election and get the one and only thing he craves. 

Peoples man my @rse, he’s just an arrogant activist who has no place in Parliament let alone being a wannabe PM

[ChrisJ]

 

[Neal H]

I think the above sums up the situation very nicely. The Prime Minister and the government have spent the past two years desperately trying not to leave the EU. I can only hope that their incompetence results in the thing they fear the most - a no-deal Brexit.

[C8RKH]

@ChrisJ - thank for you finding and posting this. I would love the "Remain Brigade" to come on and openly voice their opinions on this, but I suspect they won't.  Remain even on here have remarked about how "angry" Brexiters have been, well, maybe seeing the level of subterfuge and sabotage that has surrounded the leave process, fuelled by the Remain politicians, will allow them to understand why so many Brexiters are angry.  There is no doubt at all from this public record that the process of getting a "good deal for Britain" has been sabotaged by those in power, including the PM, who have continued to work to undermine the democratic will of the people. I hope you are all happy but the outcome will now undoubtedly be a "worse" deal for the UK and her people. The level of naivety displayed b the remain politicians in the whole negotiation just leaves me speechless and I can only assume that when on holiday in Morocco they take great delight in haggling the price of a trinket up so they can take satisfaction in having paid the highest price, so therefore, they won!

[Vanya]

On 06/02/2019 at 23:08, Buddsy said:

I just get the feeling more people seem to be understanding the European project is not what they thought it was.

All this time Ive looked but not seen a convincing argument of any reason we should remain. Ive even looked at the remain groups on facebook. They seem very quiet with no real argument to remain?

Ive said all along I love Europe and want to trade and be friends with our neighbours. Being member of an expensive shit club shouldn't be a requirement just to make that happen.

 

buddsy

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but I haven't yet seen a truly convincing argument for why Britain should leave either? What are the practical benefits? Remain is an easy argument to make - if you do nothing, things will putter along as they have been thus far - life remains somewhat predictable; things suck for some, but are good for others. Same as it ever was, and likely the same as it's ever going to be. But leaving - apart from a string of ideological reasons targeting the failings of the European Project (and they are indeed myriad), doesn't really have any leadership behind it presenting a comprehensive plan or outline to drive home exactly WHY things would be better, especially in the short term.

[Barrykearley]

Fishing

more money for uk projects

immigration and control thereof

laws

self rule

boarders

Dump human rights laws

reduce cheap imports from the EU

reduce tariffs on stuff we need from other countries which the EU have been levying. IE solar

the list really goes on and on and on. Millions and millions of hero’s gave their tomorrows for our today and for our right to self govern. 

And many folks including me - don’t care if it gets worse in the short term. Over the last 30 years it’s got worse and worse

[C8RKH]

1 hour ago, Vanya said:

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but I haven't yet seen a truly convincing argument for why Britain should leave either? What are the practical benefits? Remain is an easy argument to make - if you do nothing, things will putter along as they have been thus far - life remains somewhat predictable; things suck for some, but are good for others. Same as it ever was, and likely the same as it's ever going to be. But leaving - apart from a string of ideological reasons targeting the failings of the European Project (and they are indeed myriad), doesn't really have any leadership behind it presenting a comprehensive plan or outline to drive home exactly WHY things would be better, especially in the short term.

@Vanya - play the video of Steve Baker from a few posts above and listen to what he says. You get the answer there, straight from the horses mouth, as why you believe there was no comprehensive plan, outline or case, to leave the EU. There was. There was clear justification. It has just been buried by the politicians and system that does not want us to leave. There is a reason why Ireland had two referendums - the fist did not give the right result so they obfuscated and ran project fear then they had the 2nd. Did not the Dutch also need two to get the ratification of the EU constitution?  The game in Europe has been up for years, it's just the pigs with their snouts in the trough hadn't scoffed enough yet for the troughs to be taken away.

[JG220]

4 hours ago, C8RKH said:

@ChrisJ - thank for you finding and posting this. I would love the "Remain Brigade" to come on and openly voice their opinions on this, but I suspect they won't.  Remain even on here have remarked about how "angry" Brexiters have been, well, maybe seeing the level of subterfuge and sabotage that has surrounded the leave process, fuelled by the Remain politicians, will allow them to understand why so many Brexiters are angry.  There is no doubt at all from this public record that the process of getting a "good deal for Britain" has been sabotaged by those in power, including the PM, who have continued to work to undermine the democratic will of the people. I hope you are all happy but the outcome will now undoubtedly be a "worse" deal for the UK and her people. The level of naivety displayed b the remain politicians in the whole negotiation just leaves me speechless and I can only assume that when on holiday in Morocco they take great delight in haggling the price of a trinket up so they can take satisfaction in having paid the highest price, so therefore, they won!

I think we agreed some pages ago that a modicum of respect is what this board prides itself on.

Belittling the remain voice with comments such as ‘though I suspect they won’t’ has the effect of making you sound like you think you are superior, braver, able to confront the argument when remainers can’t or won’t. In other words you sound like an arse. 

That feedback aside, I don’t think the Steve Baker testimony changes anything not does it set out anything we didn’t already know. It was well understood that no10 had pushed aside the authority of the brexit department and the effect of that friction undoubtably is that we’ve ended up in a weaker position.

But that was obvious from the outset. With such a small majority for the leave vote, there was Always going to be approx 48% of the people involved wanting to shift one way or the other. The combination of weak majority, weak opposition, continued in fighting in the conservative party and so on and so on is the reason we are in this position. You can’t blame remainers for that. 

 

 

 

[Andyww]

1 hour ago, Vanya said:

 drive home exactly WHY things would be better, especially in the short term.

Its a matter of principle. The population was lied to, from the outset. The original vote was to join a "common market", nothing more. Along the lines of other such unions around the world.

Over the years the EU snouts-in-the-trough politicians morphed it into political union for their own ends. We were never asked.
Furthermore, why do people endorse an organisation which behaves in a way which would be considered completely unacceptable if based in the UK? Secret expense claims, payment for not turning up, allowing huge costs to be claimed by the deliberate policy of moving its entire HQ from one country to another every month. Electing a corrupt president who set up shabby tax avoidance deals for multinationals,  allowing policy to be dictated by 30,000 corporate lobbyists which work in Brussels. Turning a blind eye to huge levels of fraud, The list goes on. Even most remainers admit the EU needs reform. This will never happen, ever, so this invalidates their argument. No reform means leave.

Our own politicians are bad enough but the EU is beyond the pale. 

[C8RKH]

@JG20 I actually think my post was not inflammatory, as Brexit voter I've received a huge amount of ause over the past 2 years so I am sure you could have slept easily with that comment, but hey, feel free to be an arse too mate, it's a free world.

[JG220]

I chose my words carefully. I said it made you sound like an arse.

Whether or not you’ve recieved abuse over the past 2 years doesn’t really enter the argument I was making. Your post was inflammatory and I was giving you some objective feedback about it and then I moved on without rising to it further. The effect of your retort which actually is a bit offensive is now having the effect of derailing the very point you were trying to make and risks the  conversation shifting away from it. 

Let me try and bring it back then. I think you’re right in many respects that Brexiteers have every right to feel agrieved of how brexit is going. It is not the promised land which was set out in the referendum. Worst still, given a different path over the last two years, it would have been possible to get to a better place than we are in today. However, i still don’t see how this can be a surprise to anyone. The European integration was always going to be hard to undo, and there was no clear plan for how it was to be done anyway. We all decided in our minds what good might look like having taken the decision to go. My perspective was for the closest integration possible including a customs union, free movement, etc etc (yes, a sudo-European member). That could still be called Brexit. A hard Brexiteer May have taken the alternative view. In any event whatever you thought you voted for, there was (by the very fact there was no plan) a spectrum of options for how to leave. 

And the point I was making above is that it should have been perfectly obvious that with a very tight majority in the refendum in the first place, weak opposition, weak government and a very strong EU, it was always going to be a horrible compromise.  In every group, team, select committee even in the cabinet people fit all across that spectrum and that’s why it’s a mess. 

18 months ago in this thread we said it can’t be done and it still can’t be done satisfactorily. 

This is quite a good article which will infuriate you even more given that it sets out a possibility that we are heading for years of extensions 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2193345-game-theory-says-brexit-negotiations-are-now-all-about-avoiding-blame/

 

 

Edited February 9, 2019 by JG220

[JG220]

Looks like it’s behind a paywall 

 

Game theory says Brexit negotiations are now all about avoiding blame

The UK and the EU are continuing Brexit talks because, as game theory suggests, both sides want to avoid being blamed for the fallout, says Petros Sekeris

 

UK prime minister Theresa May and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker are at loggerheads

Xinhua/REX/Shutterstock

By Petros Sekeris

The Brexit negotiations have reached a deadlock. The future form of the UK’s border in Ireland remains a huge sticking point, and there are deep divisions in the UK’s House of Commons. Can there be a deal for the UK’s exit from the EU? And if so, when can we expect it? In this context of extreme uncertainty, game theory can help us understand the actors’ actions based on their intentions but also on the rules of the game they are playing.

Game theory uses mathematics to understand how situations are shaped when two or more ”players” are involved in strategic interactions, which together define a “game”. For simple zero-sum games between two players, like chess, there can be only one winner. But for complex negative-sum games between two or more players, like the Brexit negotiations, all sides could lose, which is where the problems begin.

Some of the losses on the UK side are already beginning to manifest: several businesses are relocating their activities, anticipating that the negotiations will break down completely and result in a no-deal Brexit. In short, the damages of Brexit are already becoming a reality, at a time when neither of the players in the game seems to be prepared to give any ground in the negotiations – and indeed at a time when both parties claim to be advancing no-deal planning. So why did the UK government and the EU agree yesterday to fresh talks later this month?

 

 

Blame game

The answer could lie in both parties’ desire not to take the blame for what appear likely to be formidable economic losses. As things stand, history will probably record Brexit as a mutually damaging divorce between the UK and EU. But we don’t yet know who will take most (or all) of the blame.

In game theoretic terms, the two players are engaged in a war of attrition (or a dynamic game of chicken) where both flex their muscles attempting to convince their opponent to give in first, while both sustain short-term costs as long as the issue remains unresolved.

The EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier may have claimed that the EU isn’t impressed by UK’s no-deal Brexit blame game, but the pressure from the EU for the UK to “clarify its intentions with respect to the next steps as soon as possible” amounts to blaming London for any negative outcome. The stakes are high because the “defeated” side will see its credibility and bargaining power harmed in the long run, be this in the context of the Scottish independence debate or of separatist tensions inside

It is almost certain that the British government will ask to delay the UK’s exit date – currently scheduled for 29 March. The EU governments will implicitly be compelled to unanimously grant the extension or else risk shouldering the blame for the failed agreement.

The actual length of any delay of the exit date will be an intensely debated question. The UK might gain significantly from still being in the EU when the European Parliament elections take place between 23 and 26 May: in theory that would give the UK a say in deciding the next EU budgets – which could provide powerful leverage in the exit negotiations.

But given the incompatibility of the players’ goals, further negotiations are unlikely to secure an agreement. Legal experts will probably then be asked to find yet another way of further extending the negotiations. The game will proceed until one side puts an end to the negotiations. But in doing so, that side will take the blame for the entire process having gone wrong. The stakes couldn’t be much higher.

 

[Barrykearley]

Let’s be clear though - what’s occurring now wasn’t what we voted for.

we voted out of everything - no deals - no cosy arrangements - nothing - just out.

keep an eye on RT news - if brexit is delayed you’ll see similar in London very quickly 

[JG220]

23 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Let’s be clear though - what’s occurring now wasn’t what we voted for.

we voted out of everything - no deals - no cosy arrangements - nothing - just out.

keep an eye on RT news - if brexit is delayed you’ll see similar in London very quickly 

No, you voted for out of everything, because that was your interpretation of what you were voting for. 

I've posted the links before, I can again if you want, but deals and trade deals were being put forward by the leave campaign before the referendum. That is why leave is the not same for everyone. 

RT news is a Russian state sponsored propaganda network, I'm not sure why you'd believe anything on there. 

in any event, i don't see much scope for riots whatever the outcome. We don't have the passion and aggression of the French  

Edited February 9, 2019 by JG220

[C8RKH]

@JG220, you made it personal to me, so you got the rise and the reaction. My post we a generalism re Remainers, not pointed at anyone specific.

As for me sounding superior making me an arse, what does that say about the constant daily comments and releases from many Remainers foretelling the end of the world and this, that and the other is all going to be fooked when NO-ONE, Remain or Leave actually has a bloody clue what tomorrow will bring?  Again a very general comment but it seems that many on the Remain side love to dish it out but get easily offended when it is thrown back at them. So again, my post wasn't personal to you, your response was personal to me, and there was the difference. Apologies if you thought my original post was aimed at you, but it wasn't, and wasn't  meant to offend.

However, as the article you posted above suggests, we are now coming to the end game and it's all about avoiding blame.  I accept that as a person who voted for Brexit, I am to blame for us leaving. That is crystal clear.

Do Remainer,s in general accept  that they are now largely responsible for the mess we are in with "how" we are going to leave?

All this BS about a "people's vote" - we had one. It was called a referendum. The biggest turn out of people the UK has seen for a vote in what seems like forever. 17m voted to leave. So what was then if it wasn't the vote of the people and therefore a "Peoples Vote"? I'd love Vince Cable to explain to me in simple words, as I'm a simple person, the difference between the original peoples vote and the one he wants!

We have a PM who doesn't want to leave. We have an opposition party leader who doesn't know what he wants over and above the fact he just wants to be el Presidente!

We have BS after BS, daily, on how no deal is going to affect this, that and the other, from the very same people who have spent two years pushing further and further away from a deal, to no deal, whilst still blaming the situation on the original people who voted leave. What makes many Remainers so smug and superior about their view, that they will not tolerate that they could be wrong, yet again might be wrong, that it will all be a disaster? What crystal ball do they have to confirm this? How is that not being smug and superior and therefore an arse.

Again, apologies, but I have had two long years being written off and labelled as a right wing, fascist, racist who is a superior arse, a moron, unintelligent and dim. I for one had enough and my tolerance is exhausted. I'm off for a bottle of wine. (or should that be whine :) )

[JG220]

You see, I don't really think of it Brexiteers vs Remainers in the way that you've set out. 

The problem is that while Brexit seems like a unilateral event, it is anything but. 

It's a bit like getting a right wing government in and then being annoyed when they issue perceived left leaning policy. That is the polarising issue of a referendum when the outcome can actually be black, while or any shade of grey in between. 

And the issue is that there is opposition to the way we undertake Brexit (Ignore no Brexit at all for a moment). If you are of the hard Brexit leading view, then you will be annoyed when elements of the agreement seem to be leaning towards a soft Brexit. And therefore, No, I don't accept that remainers are largely responsible for the mess and how we are going to leave. I think that those that thought that a non-unilateral event could be a unilateral one were always going to be disappointed. 

Where I think some criticism is justified is for those that want no Brexit at all (And i am one of those by the way), and it only makes sense if you follow the argument through (at least it does for me). Because when you've compromised within the shades of grey (because even brexiteers can't agree) then what you end up with is an almighty mess. May's deal united everyone in their hatred of it  And therefore when you get to the point where the compromise is a significantly worse position than you were in before (according to me, remember this is still my view, but it is also widely shared) then the most grown up thing do to is to pause and think and maybe not do it at all. 

Couple of arguments around the actual referendum. It was advisory, there is no doubt that it had to be acted on, but it was not a legally binding vote. My view is that we voted for the strategic direction of the UK to leave the EU. Much like we do in our large organisation (I work for a multi-national), we set the strategy, and then we go an execute it. The implementation of that strategy will get multiple reviews and considerations throughout the process. Referendum 1 therefore = Strategic intent. Referendum 2 = Implementation (how you want to leave). Where it gets less comfortable is that i would have remain on the second ballot and the reason for that is that none of the implementation methodologies, to me, are appealing. And i accept that that is democratically challenging unless you can set out what I have just done above. 

There, hopefully some insight into a remainer view, that was able enough/brave enough/british enough/sober enough/old enough (whatever the reason was, that you thought that a remainer wouldn't reply) to post a reply

[Steve V8]

18 minutes ago, JG220 said:

This is quite a good article which will infuriate you even more given that it sets out a possibility that we are heading for years of extensions 

Can our naive governance not see that any extension of the process is just giving the generals of the European union more time to undermine the UKs position. 

Whilst our politicians have been timidly trying to negotiate ourselves into a corner, the EU leaders have been in the back rooms scheming and planning how to win this war.

The EU are aware that when/if the UK leaves, and is seen to succeed, others will follow. The recent tariff free trade deals with Singapore and more recently Japan are designed to make the UKs position in the world market less favourable. The decision by Nissan not to expand in the UK will certainly have been no accident, negotiated in the back rooms of Brussels as part of the Japan deal along with massive cash insentives for Nissan and paid for in part by the British taxpayers no doubt.