Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Resurrection posted:

The fact that Westminster, the SNP, Liberals and BBC are desperate to air only Remainer propaganda still won't cut it.

So much for the vaunted "will of the people" then...

Westminster as a whole are overwhelmingly supporting Brexit however:

The SNP represent Scotland who voted (with the exception of a single constituency according to Chris Hanratty's estimates) to remain in the EU so should be campaigning to mitigate Brexit.  The Scottish Tories are the ones who are NOT representing the will of the people of Scotland.

The Liberals for the most part represent constituencies who (again according to the estimates) voted Remain and those who didn't still campaigned on a position of opposing Brexit at the 2017 General Election so should be campaigning to mitigate Brexit.

As for the BBC ... well you may think that but I could not possibly comment.

Adam Meredith posted:

Resurrection posted:

As, for example, no two members of the Shadow Cabinet seem to be able to articulate their Party's or their leader's view on Brexit ....

You appear to think quite a bit about this subject and, presumably, did so before voting to leave.

What solution occurred to you re the Irish border problem?

Perhaps Resurrection will respond to your question, but I recall a number of quotes which suggest that the question about the Irish Border was not a real concern. This is one of any number of quotes I could find in response to questions asked by myself and others. Resurrection posted:

"Similarly,  am not too interested in the North South border as far as Brexit is concerned. If a notional, politically motivated argument aligned to Brexit is sufficient to reignite the Troubles then it must have been pretty unstable anyway. As a contrived reason for stoping or limiting Brexit I tip my hat to that one. Onwards and Outwards, chaps! "

I don't think it took much thought to come up with this as an answer. 

Adam Meredith posted:

Hmack posted:

... If a notional, politically motivated argument aligned to Brexit is sufficient to reignite the Troubles then it must have been pretty unstable anyway. "

I don't think it took much thought to come up with this as an answer.

Yes, I had noted that reply and would like to investigate less facetious answers to this genuine problem.

Adam Meredith posted:

Hmack posted:

... If a notional, politically motivated argument aligned to Brexit is sufficient to reignite the Troubles then it must have been pretty unstable anyway. "

I don't think it took much thought to come up with this as an answer.

Yes, I had noted that reply and would like to investigate less facetious answers to this genuine problem.

Facetious Answer Warning!

Like 99.4% of Brexiteers and 99.8% of the less clever Remainers, I gave this not the slightest thought, and still don't. Don't care! If the Irish don't want To trade iwith us there is nothing I or you can do about it. If the Irish want a hard border, again nothing we can do about it. If you or any of your like minded colleagues think that something like this gives me any pause for thought on Brexit am afraid you will be disappointed.

The contrived machinations of the cohorts of EU mandarins, aided and abetted as I said before, by most of Westminster, the SNP , the Liberals and the BBC neither surprises or phases me. If Ireland is so me sort of answer to Brexit you have the question completely wrong.

Adam Meredith posted:

Hmack posted:

... If a notional, politically motivated argument aligned to Brexit is sufficient to reignite the Troubles then it must have been pretty unstable anyway. "

I don't think it took much thought to come up with this as an answer.

Yes, I had noted that reply and would like to investigate less facetious answers to this genuine problem.

That was a great answer, my one not yours! I commend it to all of you. As I said in one of my pending comments, if you think Ireland is the question or answer to Brexit then you are howling at the moon, barking up the wrong tree or whistling in the wind, but probably all three. I care not for Ireland and IReiand cares not for me. Pick another more plausible argument for hoping that Brexit will be destabilised and we all be converted to the great God Remain.

Glad that's facetious!

What do you really think?

Huge posted:

Glad that's facetious!

What do you really think?

Am sorry Huge, all of my responses are moderated and can take ages to be put through. 

Adam Meredith posted:

<snip>

What exactly did/do you think you are going to gain from 'Brexit' - apart from the opportunity to stick two fingers up to those you think have held your opinions in contempt and be as glib and thoughtless as you appear on this forum?

Adam, for many brexiteers, that's really easy to answer - everything the brexit campaign promised.

Free trade with Europe, free trade with the rest of the world, free exchange of services with Europe, no influence by any rules or regulations originating outside the UK, dramatically reduced immigration, millions of extra jobs (those being taken by immigrants), and no problems whatsoever.

However, I can't speak for @resurrection as I'm not them, and they don't seem prepared to tell us what they actually think.

Huge posted:

Adam Meredith posted:

<snip>

What exactly did/do you think you are going to gain from 'Brexit' - apart from the opportunity to stick two fingers up to those you think have held your opinions in contempt and be as glib and thoughtless as you appear on this forum?

Adam, for many brexiteers, that's really easy to answer - everything the brexit campaign promised.

Free trade with Europe, free trade with the rest of the world, free exchange of services with Europe, no influence by any rules or regulations originating outside the UK, dramatically reduced immigration, millions of extra jobs (those being taken by immigrants), and no problems whatsoever.

However, I can't speak for @resurrection as I'm not them, and they don't seem prepared to tell us what they actually think.

 Undhackling from the EU, its diktats, its costs and its bureaucracy. Control over immigration, borders, constrained only by our own Supreme Court and our self made laws, and  freedom to trade with anyone we want under whatever conditions we negotiate.

Resurrection posted:

Un[s]hackling from the EU, its diktats, its costs and its bureaucracy.

The issue is that the cost of being in the EU is outweighed by the financial benefits of being in the EU.  Its bureaucracy replaces UK bureaucracy and ultimately reduces bureaucracy because instead of (if you want to trade across Europe) having to comply with 29 sets of regulations as well as the UK's own regulations you have to comply with 1 set of regulation.

Accepting the EU bureaucracy has allowed the UK to flourish.  Its not despite the EU that the UK has grown from strength to strength ... its in part BECAUSE of the EU.  All the benefits the UK has, the strength of its economy, its world influence, etc. is because it has been able to leverage being part of the EU to grow its industries and service sectors - all that is (still) at risk.

Control over immigration, borders,

And a fine job the government does of controlling immigration and borders where is does have control.  Yet again "you" (meaning Brexit supporters generally) are blaming the EU for problems created (at least in part) by the UK government.

constrained only by our own Supreme Court and our self made laws, and  freedom to trade with anyone we want under whatever conditions we negotiate.

Trade will always mean negotiation.  And as a single (relatively small) country we will be the underdog.  Thats not talking the UK down, thats facing realities.  And as part of trade also means following other people's rules and giving way to some other jurisdiction.  But as a random Brexit supporter - what concessions would you be willing to see made to smooth trade deals?

Its a fallacy to think that once out of the EU only UK parliament will set laws.  There will always be tradeoffs.

You really are harking back to the days before the EEC ... but the reality is that the growth of the EEC and lately the EU has changed the world and changed the UK's place in the world.  The growth of China and India more recently has changed the world even more.  And note that despite kind words to the UK about how much nations want trade deals ... they are also threatening to disrupt (under international law) any beneficial trade deals the UK negotiates with the EU.

The Brexit supporters ideal appears to be where no one challenges the UK, and everyone offers preferential treatment to the UK.

No we won't, DD, MG & BJ assured us we would take back control and wouldn't have to comply with any EU rules, but we'll still be able to trade freely with whoever we liked - it isn't going to be a problem at all, because they told us that.

Resurrection posted:

Adam Meredith posted:

Hmack posted:

... If a notional, politically motivated argument aligned to Brexit is sufficient to reignite the Troubles then it must have been pretty unstable anyway. "

I don't think it took much thought to come up with this as an answer.

Yes, I had noted that reply and would like to investigate less facetious answers to this genuine problem.

That was a great answer, my one not yours! I commend it to all of you. As I said in one of my pending comments, if you think Ireland is the question or answer to Brexit then you are howling at the moon, barking up the wrong tree or whistling in the wind, but probably all three. I care not for Ireland and IReiand cares not for me. Pick another more plausible argument for hoping that Brexit will be destabilised and we all be converted to the great God Remain.

Resurrection - while I know we are on opposite side on the Brexit debate, I must confess to enjoying your posts on this thread: swatting away arguments with amusing, tongue-in-cheek, rhetoric.  I also suspect you enjoy a bit mischievous provocation.  Brexit is a serious issue with huge and long-lasting effects, and we contributors get serious about it. But I hope there is still room for humour in our debate.   

Resurrection - while I know we are on opposite side on the Brexit debate, I must confess to enjoying your posts on this thread: swatting away arguments with amusing, tongue-in-cheek, rhetoric.  I also suspect you enjoy a bit mischievous provocation.  Brexit is a serious issue with huge and long-lasting effects, and we contributors get serious about it. But I hope there is still room for humour in our debate.   

 

Yep thanks,I really enjoy and appreciate  crossing verbal swords with any and all of you. I know my views are contrarian for many of you, but in general if you believe in something stand by your own principles and don’t feel it necessary to convert or be converted, or over rationalise the argument. Some people just cannot be converted eg me!

Resurrection posted:

Resurrection - while I know we are on opposite side on the Brexit debate, I must confess to enjoying your posts on this thread: swatting away arguments with amusing, tongue-in-cheek, rhetoric.  I also suspect you enjoy a bit mischievous provocation.  Brexit is a serious issue with huge and long-lasting effects, and we contributors get serious about it. But I hope there is still room for humour in our debate.   

 

Yep thanks,I really enjoy and appreciate  crossing verbal swords with any and all of you. I know my views are contrarian for many of you, but in general if you believe in something stand by your own principles and don’t feel it necessary to convert or be converted, or over rationalise the argument. Some people just cannot be converted eg me!

I have to agree that your current posts are somewhat more engaging than the “you lost ! Get over it !” of your previous incarnation.

You have mentioned working in Europe a few times. Did you ever work as part of the EU gravy train ?

Are you in line to collect an EU pension, as per your undoubtable hero, Farage ?

Don Atkinson posted:

 

Yep thanks,I really enjoy and appreciate  crossing verbal swords with any and all of you. I know my views are contrarian for many of you, but in general if you believe in something stand by your own principles and don’t feel it necessary to convert or be converted, or over rationalise the argument. Some people just cannot be converted eg me!

I have to agree that your current posts are somewhat more engaging than the “you lost ! Get over it !” of your previous incarnation.

You have mentioned working in Europe a few times. Did you ever work as part of the EU gravy train ?

Are you in line to collect an EU pension, as per your undoubtable hero, Farage ?

No, I never worked for the EU and therefore never got one of the lovely Farage type pensions. BUT, as I did work there for a number of years on a reduced tax status I am also now paid a Belgian pension, thank them very much! To show you how grossly overpaid our own pensioners are, working 5 years in Brussels results in me receiving financially half a U.K. State pension that takes a lifetime of work here to earn.  

Since I retired, institutions seem to be falling over themselves to donate money to my greatest cause i.e. me. In fact, courtesy of a pension pot I did not know I was entitled to and only discovered a couple of months ago, my lovely shiny new B&W 803 D3s are keeping me very happy. Blimey, I have inadvertently turned the Padded Cell back to music.

Resurrection posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

You have mentioned working in Europe a few times. Did you ever work as part of the EU gravy train ?

No, I never worked for the EU and therefore never got one of the lovely Farage type pensions.

Ignoring the financial benefits to yourself ... do you not feel that being part of the EU was a benefit to yourself and your career in that it allowed you to easily work elsewhere in the EU?  Is there not a danger that others in the future will not be able to have such advantages and so that will stifle UK citizens and as a result the UK economy?

I've always said that I do not consider the EU perfect and ideally there needs to be reforms, but are you not in danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water for there are many advantages of EU membership which will NOT be replicated in trade deals however much the Leave campaigners want you to believe.

Resurrection posted:

"Like 99.4% of Brexiteers and 99.8% of the less clever Remainers, I gave this not the slightest thought, and still don't. Don't care! If the Irish don't want To trade with us there is nothing I or you can do about it. If the Irish want a hard border, again nothing we can do about it. If you or any of your like minded colleagues think that something like this gives me any pause for thought on Brexit am afraid you will be disappointed".

I don't think you get the point a number of us are trying to make. 

The Irish obviously do want to trade with us - no surprise there. But take away any question of economics. They are also fervently opposed to a hard border every bit as much as we are, and for exactly the same reasons. They are no more in favour of igniting the sectarian troubles in Northern Ireland than we are. Where on Earth did you come up with the premise that the Irish might "want a hard border" ?

I too have no ties with Ireland (North or South) save for a number of enjoyable holidays and motorbike trips on both sides of the border. However, when the referendum was announced, and it became clear that there was a possibility, however remote, that the 'Leave' campaign might win, the very first concern that came to mind for me was the question of the Irish border. I simply cannot understand how anyone can so glibly dismiss the potential dangers associated with a return to a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.   

I take it that you have no relatives serving in the armed forces or in the police force in Northern Ireland itself?

Luckily, it is extremely unlikely that we will end up with a hard border. Our negotiators, unlike many on the "Hard - just do it!" Brexit side, at least appear to be aware of the potential problems and will do whatever it takes to avoid a hard border.

Thank goodness for that!  

Eloise posted:

Resurrection posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

You have mentioned working in Europe a few times. Did you ever work as part of the EU gravy train ?

No, I never worked for the EU and therefore never got one of the lovely Farage type pensions.

Ignoring the financial benefits to yourself ... do you not feel that being part of the EU was a benefit to yourself and your career in that it allowed you to easily work elsewhere in the EU?  Is there not a danger that others in the future will not be able to have such advantages and so that will stifle UK citizens and as a result the UK economy?

I've always said that I do not consider the EU perfect and ideally there needs to be reforms, but are you not in danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water for there are many advantages of EU membership which will NOT be replicated in trade deals however much the Leave campaigners want you to believe.

Eloise,

Our years in Belgium were very happy. It was during the '80s and pre Schengen open borders so I had my passport checked every time I came and left the airport which I did  a huge amount. My jobs had a European remit so I went to all countries except, of course, Eastern Europe, which I have never visited to this day.

As I have said before, I love Europe but have no faith or belief in the EU as it has morphed into since we entered the EEC in, is it, 1974. I feel that as citizens of the UK or Europe the politicos have hijacked controls over far too many aspects of our lives. I have no belief in the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Parliament, Mayors springing up everywhere, Parish Councillors, Local Councillors, MPs, MEPs and so on and so forth. In reality, I just want politicians and their interferences out of my life. 

Trading between nations has occurred since humans found they had skills and could communicate. The EU has long since developed into an overarching federalist institution with total European ambitions that I can never subscribe to. Plumber arrived to fix waste disposal unit, so have to go! ????

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"Like 99.4% of Brexiteers and 99.8% of the less clever Remainers, I gave this not the slightest thought, and still don't. Don't care! If the Irish don't want To trade with us there is nothing I or you can do about it. If the Irish want a hard border, again nothing we can do about it. If you or any of your like minded colleagues think that something like this gives me any pause for thought on Brexit am afraid you will be disappointed".

I don't think you get the point a number of us are trying to make. 

The Irish obviously do want to trade with us - no surprise there. But take away any question of economics. They are also fervently opposed to a hard border every bit as much as we are, and for exactly the same reasons. They are no more in favour of igniting the sectarian troubles in Northern Ireland than we are. Where on Earth did you come up with the premise that the Irish might "want a hard border" ?

I too have no ties with Ireland (North or South) save for a number of enjoyable holidays and motorbike trips on both sides of the border. However, when the referendum was announced, and it became clear that there was a possibility, however remote, that the 'Leave' campaign might win, the very first concern that came to mind for me was the question of the Irish border. I simply cannot understand how anyone can so glibly dismiss the potential dangers associated with a return to a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.   

I take it that you have no relatives serving in the armed forces or in the police force in Northern Ireland itself?

Luckily, it is extremely unlikely that we will end up with a hard border. Our negotiators, unlike many on the "Hard - just do it!" Brexit side, at least appear to be aware of the potential problems and will do whatever it takes to avoid a hard border.

Thank goodness for that!  

Hmack,

No, I have no connections with Ireland, North or South. In fact I have never been to Northern Ireland but thoroughly enjoyed my visits to the South. However, my son played for London Irish at mini level when they were still based in Richmond and were a very good side. 

Our game of Brexit will be as complicated or as simple as the politicians make it. My faith in politicians is minimal, so assume the worst. I have no heart or stomach for fighting a battle that I believe to be unnecessary and irrelevant even though that might ruffle your own and others feathers somewhat. If and when we Leave (Oh Yes, I'm A Believer, as the Monkees once sang) there will be lots of challenges that the spineless monkeys infesting our Parliament will have to deal with, but I suspect we will have cataclysmic political change other than Brexit to contend with anyway as people polarise between Corbynism, weedy liberalism and eventually reality. 

Fixate if you must on the border question but if you do that you will be missing several series of Game of Thrones Westminster style ripping apart accepted norms. If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long.

This game has legs and many, many twists yet to come

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Eh? May I refer you to Dickens A Tale of Two Cities rather than the rather sick conclusion you ended up at.

Resurrection posted:

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Eh? May I refer you to Dickens A Tale of Two Cities rather than the rather sick conclusion you ended up at.

"It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times". Rather like now, eh Hmack. And in conclusion as the tumbril takes Sydney Carton to his fate, "It's a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done....." 

Resurrection posted:

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Eh? May I refer you to Dickens A Tale of Two Cities rather than the rather sick conclusion you ended up at.

Tumbrels (or Tumbrils) is not a commonly used word (at least not in my circles) , so not surprisingly I looked it up in the dictionary:

Tumbrel - "one of the carts used during the French Revolution to convey victims to the guillotine".

It's a very long time since I read Dickens - "A Tale of Two Cities", but I believe the reference to Tumbrels in his novel is pretty much in line with the dictionary reference above. What else should my conclusion have been? You may well have used the term and its context in your post as an attempted and possibly misguided joke. I certainly hope so. 

Resurrection posted:

Resurrection posted:

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Eh? May I refer you to Dickens A Tale of Two Cities rather than the rather sick conclusion you ended up at.

"It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times". Rather like now, eh Hmack. And in conclusion as the tumbril takes Sydney Carton to his fate, "It's a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done....." 

OK Resurrection:

I am really glad that your post was indeed 'tongue in cheek'.

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

Resurrection posted:

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"If the incomprehensible numpty Grieve abetted by the equally incomprehensible numpty Starmer continue to play fast and loose with democratic decisions via weasel, legalistic words then the tumbrels will be out for them ere long."

Why? Because they do not want your side to have unfettered, unaccountable and undemocratic control over the details of a Brexit agreement, or because they are standing up for human rights protection? 

You might be using the reference to 'Tumbrels' (or 'Tumbrils'), as a joke, but I don't know you, so on the other hand you might be serious. This is a particularly unpleasant reference given the actions of a certain individual belonging to the 'Britain First' movement. Is this the sort of thing you really want?  

Eh? May I refer you to Dickens A Tale of Two Cities rather than the rather sick conclusion you ended up at.

"It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times". Rather like now, eh Hmack. And in conclusion as the tumbril takes Sydney Carton to his fate, "It's a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done....." 

OK Resurrection:

I am really glad that your post was indeed 'tongue in cheek'.

Far too often, things I have inserted in my comments are being taken as far right diatribes when in fact I have  taken the time to use historical or literary allusions to emphasise my point. I do not mind taking flak where tit is  due but being left of my point of view does not give anyone carte blanche to jump to nasty conclusions.

My response was not "tongue in cheek" which I assume is your retraction of your own accusation. I don't like Grieve or Starmer as I find them both very duplicitous. If you feel they have redeeming features, and I know there are a few on this board who do, then come back with salient arguments that get your actual point over.