Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Resurrection posted:

Huge posted:

Well, well, resorting to reductio ad absurdum: Now that's a weak debating tactic, particularly for someone who previously accused me of oversimplification!

Whether you like it or not border controls (and the political implications thereof) are an issue for brexit - you can't just brush it under the table.  Especially given the brexit mantra of take back control of our borders!

"When we decided to Leave we decided to make or break all our own decisions."

So, make your decision...  Do you want to renege on the Good Friday, St Andrews and Stormont House agreements, create hard border with the RoI and damn the consequences; even if that consequence is a likely resurgence of Irish Republican terrorism?

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Oh well, you seem to have completely lost the plot with this one...

Wasn't there something there about...     Let's see, oh yes...     "Border Control"?     Such as, perhaps, between NI and RoI (and thus the rest of the EU)?

Huge posted:

Resurrection posted:

Huge posted:

Well, well, resorting to reductio ad absurdum: Now that's a weak debating tactic, particularly for someone who previously accused me of oversimplification!

Whether you like it or not border controls (and the political implications thereof) are an issue for brexit - you can't just brush it under the table.  Especially given the brexit mantra of take back control of our borders!

"When we decided to Leave we decided to make or break all our own decisions."

So, make your decision...  Do you want to renege on the Good Friday, St Andrews and Stormont House agreements, create hard border with the RoI and damn the consequences; even if that consequence is a likely resurgence of Irish Republican terrorism?

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Oh well, you seem to have completely lost the plot with this one...

Wasn't there something there about...     Let's see, oh yes...     "Border Control"?     Such as, perhaps, between NI and RoI (and thus the rest of the EU)?

We can do what we like with our borders as soon as we have them back under our control, although I admit our politicians have let us down pretty badly in that department pre-Brexit, so no great faith there going forward, but at least we can start pointing fingers at them, and them alone. 

Claire! Klaar! Claro! Clear!

Resurrection posted:

Huge posted:

Resurrection posted:

Huge posted:

<snip>

"When we decided to Leave we decided to make or break all our own decisions."

So, make your decision...  Do you want to renege on the Good Friday, St Andrews and Stormont House agreements, create hard border with the RoI and damn the consequences; even if that consequence is a likely resurgence of Irish Republican terrorism?

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Oh well, you seem to have completely lost the plot with this one...

Wasn't there something there about...     Let's see, oh yes...     "Border Control"?     Such as, perhaps, between NI and RoI (and thus the rest of the EU)?

We can do what we like with our borders as soon as we have them back under our control, although I admit our politicians have let us down pretty badly in that department pre-Brexit, so no great faith there going forward, but at least we can start pointing fingers at them, and them alone. 

Claire! Klaar! Claro! Clear!

You're still avoiding the question.

Resurrection posted:

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Possibly worth repeating:

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

This beggars belief...

Hilary Benn, the committee chair starts.

Q: You told the Commons that the Brexit impact assessments do not exist in the form that MPs assumed. Is that why you have not handed them over?

Davis says that is correct.

There are formal definitions of impact assessments, he says. The work done by the government does not fit those definitions.

But he says the government decided to give the committee the best information it could, or the closest information.

Q: So has the government undertaken an assessment of the impact of Brexit?

Not on a sector by sector basis, Davis says.

Okay for certain people whatever the consequences of Brexit its worth it to (paraphrasing) "get rid of the undemocratic EU interference in the UK's sovereignty" ... but when the government say they want the best deal for the UK, how can you get that when you haven't carried out any detailed impact analysis.

And if there has been no impact analysis carried out, why did David Davis (and others) suggest there had been?

So much for "taking back control".

Eloise posted:

And if there has been no impact analysis carried out, why did David Davis (and others) suggest there had been?

At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, he (and they) were lying. Or, more precisely, misleading parliament.

Not only does the word impact appear in DD's earlier statements as Benn pointed out, the semantic fudge about only qualitative rather than quantitative analyses is rubbish. He is on record using (separately) the words impact and quantitative to describe the analyses, which he assured a Lords committee in 2016 would be complete before A50 was triggered.

It's disgraceful. Even ignoring the particular words used, when and to whom, the whole thing stinks of muddled incompetence and a profoundly inappropriately blasé attitude towards informing and being accountable to parliament.

Phillip Hammond has dropped another bombshell this afternoon ... they haven't even set down in cabinet what they want the end position to look like.

Yes things change and develop as negotiations go on and more information becomes clear ... but surely you start off with a clear idea of your ideal situation?

I was also amazed to hear members of the Exiting the EU committee "asking" where the EU's impact studies were - obviously unaware of the 47 reports published on the European Parliament website!

Words simply fail me. It is beyond contempt !

When I started this thread, I used the words "Are we sleepwalking out of Europe". The word "we" was meant to relate to the electorate.

Never in my worst nightmares did I visualise the extent and depth of incompetence, deception and downright lying that we have witnessed this past two years.

"Despair" doesn't come close to describing my feelings !

There's no need for impact assessments or to know an desired end goal as a negotiating position as the only important thing is to exit the EU.  All else is just irrelevant distraction and can be sorted out later. 

It sure seems like a complicated and expensive business us leaving the EU. One has to wonder why  Remain failed to spell out the extent of these obstacles in their campaign.

Ray

thebigfredc posted:

It sure seems like a complicated andexpensive business us leaving the EU. One has to wonder why  Remain failed to spell out the extent of these obstacles in their campaign.

Ray

ISTR that the Chancellor at the time mentioned £4k per person!

That sounded quite expensive to me !

Kinda works out at c.£260bn.

thebigfredc posted:

It sure seems like a complicated and expensive business us leaving the EU. One has to wonder why  Remain failed to spell out the extent of these obstacles in their campaign.

They did spell out the complicity and expense ... but it was dismissed as “project fear”.

Eloise posted:

thebigfredc posted:

It sure seems like a complicated and expensive business us leaving the EU. One has to wonder why  Remain failed to spell out the extent of these obstacles in their campaign.

They did spell out the complicity and expense ... but it was dismissed as “project fear”.

I think you meant "complexity", but either will do, actually!

Spelling out the case for remain was derided as comprising advice from "experts", said with a sneer.

winkyincanada posted:

Eloise posted:

They did spell out the complicity and expense ... but it was dismissed as “project fear”.

I think you meant "complexity", but either will do, actually!

You’re right... I’m sure there is some complicity happening too!

It's hard to see any positives in this but perhaps, just perhaps, the hard Brexiteers and DUP are painting themselves into a corner and the moderates in the Conservative party and Labour will form some agreement to support a Brexit based upon EFTA-type membership. The hardliners will argue this is a betrayal of what people voted for in the referendum (not that they were asked what type of Brexit should be pursued) but I suspect this would go down very well with business and the City and so the Conservative party could support it.  It might also gain the support of SNP and Welsh interests so could keep the Union together. No doubt some ministerial resignations could follow (e.g. Davis, Johnson, Grayling) and some Tory Brexiteers like Redwood and IDS might spontaneously combust but I think that's a price most people would be willing to pay  

Adam Meredith posted:

Resurrection posted:

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Possibly worth repeating:

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

Too true lol - Let's just get out of the sty - leave the trough to the pigs ...

ynwa250505 posted:

Adam Meredith posted:

Resurrection posted:

Talk about absurdum! As I told you, why not add Obama, Trump and Kim Jong Un to your weird argument. Sovereignty, Border Control, Judicial Control and Financial Control. You can argue the toss about the rest as much as you like. 

Possibly worth repeating:

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

Too true lol - Let's just get out of the sty - leave the trough to the pigs ...

When I read this I wasn't too sure who exactly it was aimed at, although I had suspicions, so just left it. That, and to hark back to the Marxian (brothers variety) discussions, was actually off to a Night at The Opera, although it was the ROH and  the Royal Ballet. Again, the subject was appropriate as it was the Nutcracker Suite and was a pleasant digression from nuts in a Padded Cell. My sentiment is of course to get out of the sty and leave the EU Augean Stables to the inhabitants for them to clean out. ????

Resurrection posted:

When I read this I wasn't too sure who exactly it was aimed at, although I had suspicions ...

Just to clarify: I was offering it to - everyone but you.

Don Atkinson posted:

thebigfredc posted:

It sure seems like a complicated andexpensive business us leaving the EU. One has to wonder why  Remain failed to spell out the extent of these obstacles in their campaign.

Ray

ISTR that the Chancellor at the time mentioned £4k per person!

That sounded quite expensive to me !

Kinda works out at c.£260bn.

Well, I have just re-read the pamphlet distributed to every household by the Government prior to the referendum which sets out their argument why we should vote Remain.....nope, no mention of a huge divorce bill or of the seemingly intractable problem of the Irish border.

So I am sticking with my contention that it was a major failing of the Remain campaign not to have highlighted the likelihood of these difficulties during the negotiation phase.

Ray

Not only were the Brexit campaign guilty of grossly underestimating the difficulty, so were the remain campaign!

In part, the Brexit side did it intentionally so as not to weaken their campaign, but both sides also did it through incompetence and sheer lack of planning.

I agree, Huge. Both sides of the campaign did a poor job. On the Remain side I recall the campaign as being initially complacent (the underlying tone being "We know what's best, just vote Remain") and then, in reaction to Leave's approach, it geared up and deployed what was labelled as 'project fear'.    The campaign was nearly as bad as the planning that had been done in the event that the outcome of the referendum was Leave.  

thebigfredc posted:

 

Well, I have just re-read the pamphlet distributed to every household by the Government prior to the referendum which sets out their argument why we should vote Remain.....nope, no mention of a huge divorce bill or of the seemingly intractable problem of the Irish border.

So I am sticking with my contention that it was a major failing of the Remain campaign not to have highlighted the likelihood of these difficulties during the negotiation phase.

Ray

Neither side of the campaign covered themselves in glory, I think most reasonable people would agree with that.

Which surely lends support to the argument that there should be another vote once the terms of the deal (if any) are known.  As we saw a few posts back, David Davis himself is on record as saying that referendums should only be held when the maximal information is available.

TBH I suspect MDS is on the right track above - the current ridiculousness may push things towards a softer deal.

 

TBH I suspect MDS is on the right track above - the current ridiculousness may push things towards a softer deal.

To paraphrase Paul Simon, "I would not give you false hope on this strange and mournful day!"

Committed though I may be to Brexit, the display of utter incompetence by the so called Brexit team, never mind Theresa May, who will undoubtedly go down as the most incompetent and appeasing Prime Minister since Chamberlain, makes me despair. The attitudes of Junker and Barnier threatening us with 48 hours to agree a Brexit deal is quite breathtaking but unsurprising. 

This is quite the oddest and maddest political situation I have ever seen. We're doomed! Doomed I tell ye!!

Resurrection posted:

<snip>

This is quite the oddest and maddest political situation I have ever seen.

<snip>

Well, I never though I'd agree with you on this thread, but I agree with that bit!    - or in the circumstances should that be

Resurrection posted:

The attitudes of Junker and Barnier threatening us with 48 hours to agree a Brexit deal is quite breathtaking but unsurprising. 

 

It would be both breathtaking and surprising if that was what they'd actually done!  

Obviously it isn't what they've done at all, but it would certainly be surprising if they did.