Politics POLL: Brexit Withdrawal Agreement

[dysfunction]

so @Job are you going to give something specific or just avoid an answer as usual?
Come one let's see if you can come up with something comprehensive and not avoid it for the 4th time

 

[Job]

How about I post a move by remainers that has supported the result of the greatest act of democracy in recent times.

Heres it is.

Ginas first legal challange helped by accident.

Thats it.

 

[Job]

Oh so when your side does it they're clever moves. You're officially beyond a joke. The fact that you're not only ok with the things I outlined above but you think they're "clever moves" and you encourage them is astonishing. You clearly don't give a toss about your country, despite accusing remainers of just that.

I give a toss about who runs this show..the people or those who think they know better.

Who's it to be?

Seriously, time to make up our minds, a political dictatorship or a democracy?

Forget all that boloks about Avacado shortages or Nannys going up in price, do you want the people to decide their future..good or bad, or do you want the 'clever' people to decide?

Its quite a decision..which you seem to have all ready taken.

 

[caLLous]

Try harder. The legal challenge was a response to stop Johnson taking the piss (the fact that the Supreme Court agreed backs that up). It was justified and anyone who says it wasn't is happy to see the country burn.

Give specific examples of remainers "stretching the rules". And while you're at it, tell us why exactly you're so desperate for Brexit to happen.

 

[Job]

The Supreme court had no juristiction whatsoever.
They assumed it on the day, officially a kangaroo court by any standards.
An utter travesty, but also a sign of things to come.

 

[caLLous]

I give a toss about who runs this show..the people or those who think they know better.

Who's it to be?

Seriously, time to make up our minds, a political dictatorship or a democracy?

Forget all that boloks about Avacado shortages or Nannys going up in price, do you want the people to decide their future..good or bad, or do you want the 'clever' people to decide?

Its quite a decision..which you seem to have all ready taken.

So your entire argument is that leave won so we must leave, whether it's with no deal or a shit deal?

I shouldn't need to remind you that Farage himself said that, if it was close, there should be another referendum? Or should I point you at the countless stories of Leave voters changing their minds after they've realised what leaving entails? Or this...

I don't think there will be another referendum, I don't necessarily think there *should* be another referendum, but letting this Government get away with what they're trying to get away with without intervening would be the definition of a dereliction of duty.

I simply don't believe that you're so for democracy that, even if the country burns to the ground, we must leave the EU under any circumstances. What are your real reasons?

 

[Job]

Because the country isnt going to burn to the ground.
Its just utterly ridiculous fear mongering, there is no such thing as a 'no deal'
The 'deals' have all ready been sorted, 99% of problems have been sorted in case we no deal.
Customs has a 6 month reserve with no change for it to catch up..all the health reciprocations are in place.
WTO rules are entirely flexible for an economy as big as Europe.

Pensions..expats..its all worked out or at least 90% there.
Its an ideological seperation, youre barely going to notice it and Im pretty sure even under no deal we will follow 99% of sensible EU rules.

 

[caLLous]

That post is a perfect snapshot of your ignorance.

 

[Job]

Your post is a perfect snapshot of your belief in propaganda.

 

[caLLous]

Another day, another reason why Johnson and co were trying to rush the deal through comes to light... it turns out he lied. Who would've thought?

Fears rise over post-Brexit workers’ rights and regulations

The British government is planning to diverge from the EU on regulation and workers’ rights after Brexit, despite its pledge to maintain a “level playing field” in prime minister Boris Johnson’s deal, according to an official paper shared by ministers this week.

The government paper drafted by Dexeu, the Brexit department, with input from Downing Street stated that the UK was open to significant divergence, even though Brussels is insisting on comparable regulatory provisions.

The issue will come to a head when the UK begins the next phase of talks with the EU to forge a new trade deal. However, the UK in effect still faces the prospect of a no-deal Brexit next week unless EU states agree a new extension date for when the UK will leave the bloc. France was on Friday pushing for a shorter extension date than the one Mr Johnson has requested.

In a passage that could alarm Labour MPs who have backed the Brexit bill, the leaked government document also said the drafting of workers’ rights and environmental protection commitments “leaves room for interpretation”.

The paper appears to contradict comments made by Mr Johnson on Wednesday when he said the UK was committed to “the highest possible standards” for workers’ rights and environmental standards.

The document said the UK’s and EU’s “interpretation of these [level playing field] commitments will be very different” and that the text represented a “much more open starting point for future relationship negotiations”. It added that London believed that binding arbitration would be “inappropriate”.

The document boasts that “UK negotiators successfully resisted the inclusion of all UK-wide LPF rules” in the previous Theresa May deal.

Jenny Chapman, Labour’s shadow Brexit minister, said: “These documents confirm our worst fears. Boris Johnson’s Brexit is a blueprint for a deregulated economy, which will see vital rights and protections torn up.”

Mr Johnson has in the past been a persistent critic of what he sees as unnecessary regulation from Brussels. Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, this week pointed out that Mr Johnson had once described employment regulation as “back-breaking”, saying the bill’s provisions offered “no real protection at all”.

But the prime minister vowed to “ensure that whatever the EU comes up with, we can match it and pass it into the law of this country”.

The document gets to the heart of the dilemma between London’s desire to stay within the EU’s regulatory orbit while also seeking to diverge from the EU economic model. Speaking in New York in September, Mr Johnson set out a vision of Britain as a low-tax, lightly regulated economy on the edge of Europe — a vision that alarms some EU leaders.

Mr Johnson’s deal leaves the UK with freedom to set its own regulatory standards from the end of its post-Brexit transition period, which runs to the end of 2022 at the latest. But the EU has warned that Britain’s prospects of getting an ambitious trade deal with Brussels depend on it continuing to uphold robust rules.

The new deal is very different to Theresa May’s, in which the UK made a legal commitment not to roll back EU regulatory standards in areas such as social and environmental protections as long as her “backstop” plan for preventing a hard Irish border was needed.

This was scrapped by British and EU negotiators because, unlike the backstop, Mr Johnson’s deal does not involve a UK-EU customs union with free movement of goods.

Under Mr Johnson’s deal, the legally binding “level playing field” provisions that remain in the exit treaty are almost exclusively limited to Northern Ireland. But the non-binding political declaration on future EU-UK relations makes clear that there is a direct link between Britain’s regulatory environment and market access.

The declaration said both Britain and the EU should continue to uphold “the common high standards” applicable at the end of the post-Brexit transition period in areas such as state-aid policy, social and environmental regulation and tax.

It also made clear that the ambition of any future trade deal would be linked to Britain’s willingness to stick closely to relevant “union and international standards”.

Existing EU trade deals, such as those with Japan and Canada, have some provisions on limitations to state aid and respect for international climate and labour market accords, but breaches of the commitments do not lead to punitive tariffs.

EU officials have been clear, though, that something stronger is needed for the UK, given the risks that regulatory dumping in Britain, combined with extensive market access, could pose to European companies. The declaration stipulates that the level playing field commitments in a future trade deal should be backed by “enforcement and dispute settlement”.

Dexeu decline to comment.

 

[Job]

Oh so when your side does it they're clever moves. You're officially beyond a joke. The fact that you're not only ok with the things I outlined above but you think they're "clever moves" and you encourage them is astonishing. You clearly don't give a toss about your country, despite accusing remainers of just that.

Your ability to ignore the concerted efforts of the remain camp to thwart the process is simply because you are biased.
If the remainers found a hidden page in the Magna Carta that said if they all turned up dressed as chickens and sang three blind mice , parliament could legally dissolve the referendum and tattoo idiot on every brexiters head, you would be jumping for joy.

Careful what you wish for because one day that strategy will come for you.

 

[dysfunction]

How about I post a move by remainers that has supported the result of the greatest act of democracy in recent times.

Heres it is.

Ginas first legal challange helped by accident.

Thats it.

Nope failed again.

 

[caLLous]

Your ability to ignore the concerted efforts of the remain camp to thwart the process is simply because you are biased.
If the remainers found a hidden page in the Magna Carta that said if they all turned up dressed as chickens and sang three blind mice , parliament could legally dissolve the referendum and tattoo idiot on every brexiters head, you would be jumping for joy.

Careful what you wish for because one day that strategy will come for you.

When "the process" is a government trying to pull a fast one and either rush a shit deal through or crash out with no deal, then anyone who tries to thwart it deserves a medal imo.

Brexit is a massive change of direction and isn't something to be rushed - Johnson and co don't give a flying fuck about "the national interest" or "the will of the people" (2 catchphrases that have been done to death over the three years since the referendum), they want to get it done to score political points and make them and their toff mates richer. If there isn't a deal which suits everybody then either scrap the whole thing or ask the people definitively what they want, don't just plough on regardless. So much avoidable and irreversible damage will be done.

Also, how do you legally dissolve something that wasn't legally binding in the first place?

 

[caLLous]

 

[Scouse]

Honestly. Getting it done is the right thing. It's not possible to leave the EU on better terms than we have - so *all* deals will be shit on paper.

Remainers need to accept that there's no appetite for a second referendum, that they've been fucked over by the tories (a lot of remainers still voted tory when they had a chance to boot them out) and that they sin't going to like it. But tough titties for everyone.

It's not irreversable though - we can always rejoin. So kick up a stink like the 20% of hard-leave tories did. There's more of you, so it won't take as long to get your way....

 

[dysfunction]

Honestly. Getting it done is the right thing. It's not possible to leave the EU on better terms than we have - so *all* deals will be shit on paper.

Remainers need to accept that there's no appetite for a second referendum, that they've been fucked over by the tories (a lot of remainers still voted tory when they had a chance to boot them out) and that they sin't going to like it. But tough titties for everyone.

It's not irreversable though - we can always rejoin. So kick up a stink like the 20% of hard-leave tories did. There's more of you, so it won't take as long to get your way....

looks like you've become a brexiter or just given up or something.

Rejoining would not be on same terms we have now. It would be a monumental challenge to persuade people to do so. We would have to have the Euro, lose out on rebates, join the Schengen etc

 

[caLLous]

Honestly. Getting it done is the right thing. It's not possible to leave the EU on better terms than we have - so *all* deals will be shit on paper.

So don't do it then. :| I don't see how that's such an outrageous opinion... talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. I'm bored to death with the whole thing and not necessarily for a second referendum but I wish everybody would just take a step back and see how stupid the whole thing is.

It's not irreversable though - we can always rejoin.

We can always rejoin... on worse terms, because there's no way the UK will be re-admitted with as good a deal as it currently has. That's what's irreversible about it.

 

[Job]

S

When "the process" is a government trying to pull a fast one and either rush a shit deal through or crash out with no deal, then anyone who tries to thwart it deserves a medal imo.

Brexit is a massive change of direction and isn't something to be rushed - Johnson and co don't give a flying fuck about "the national interest" or "the will of the people" (2 catchphrases that have been done to death over the three years since the referendum), they want to get it done to score political points and make them and their toff mates richer. If there isn't a deal which suits everybody then either scrap the whole thing or ask the people definitively what they want, don't just plough on regardless. So much avoidable and irreversible damage will be done.

Also, how do you legally dissolve something that wasn't legally binding in the first place?

Shouldnt be rushed.

Spits out cornflakes.


And its the tiresome weaseling by attempts to ridicule statements that are the core of the issue.
Its like listening to Homer.
'I suppose your going to use 'facts' and 'evidence'.

Are you still prattling on about that vote?..we've moved on..so should you.

 

[dysfunction]

I do wonder if Boris had joined the Remain campaign the referendum result would have been different.
Except he chose to better his own career and his bank balance

 

[Job]

It hardly matters who it is, someone has to represent the majority.
Would you rather no one stepped up to defend Brexit against the establishment.
You probably would, but then again you care not a jot for the continuing public confidence in politics, as long as everything stays really cheap.

Germany has slipped into recession...who knows what will play out.

 

[Job]

Thetes no going back in because we will never really leave and our judiciary is all ready corrupt as it has shown , so its next to pointless trying to keep it independent from globalism and social justice.
We will just slowly slide back in, its not about the EU its about the vast majority of people having no power against the rich.

 

[Scouse]

So don't do it then. :| I don't see how that's such an outrageous opinion...

I don't think it's an outrageous opinion at all.

However, it's an impractical and unrealistic one. Like it or not there was a democratic vote (yes, it was shite, and you *must* blame the tories for that) - and if you couple that with the lack of appetite for another referendum then there absolutely must be only one outcome.

It's not giving up - it's an acceptance of practical reality.

 

[caLLous]

Brexit referendum should never have been called, say majority of voters

 

[Scouse]

Brexit referendum should never have been called, say majority of voters

Yep - but they'd *still* vote Tory in a GE and they don't want another confirmatory referendum.

So we're back at tough titties aren't we.

 

[Yoni]

Brexit referendum should never have been called, say majority of voters

Sadly I am concerend about who was interviewed for this as the Observer is the source.... I do agree though

 

[Yoni]

Yep - but they'd *still* vote Tory in a GE and they don't want another confirmatory referendum.

So we're back at tough titties aren't we.

up until recently I have been a tory voter my entire life... so not entirely true. I will not vote Tory in the next election and I didn't in the last couple either

 

[Scouse]

up until recently I have been a tory voter my entire life... so not entirely true. I will not vote Tory in the next election and I didn't in the last couple either

There'll be some people like you @Yoni - but sadly the polling confirms my tough titties view.

The reality is that if bozza gets his way and a GE before xmas (and the lib dems are offering to help with that @Wij) then it's a tory win.

And nowhere near enough want another ref. So....

....get it done, get on with it.

 

[caLLous]

UK gives up £7bn windfall from European Investment Bank

Under Johnson’s withdrawal deal, Britain has abandoned any claim to European Investment Bank profits
Boris Johnson has given up on a windfall for the UK of almost £7bn, which would have covered more than a fifth of the “divorce bill” from the EU.

Under the terms of the new withdrawal bill, which passed its second reading in parliament last Tuesday, Britain has abandoned any claim to the accumulated profits from the European Investment Bank (EIB), which is owned by EU nations.

The UK put in €3.5bn to help finance the EIB in 1973, 16.1% of the total at the time. The EIB, which has invested in infrastructure projects including Crossrail and the London “super sewer”, has since built up reserves through retained profits.

At the end of 2018 the UK’s share of the reserves was worth £6.5bn. That is estimated to have risen to almost £7bn. However, the withdrawal agreement states that the UK will receive only what it paid in 1973, without profits or interest.

Critics of the agreement have said it leaves the UK with liabilities relating to the eurozone. Robert Rowland, the Brexit Party MEP, said the UK could be forced to pay in more than €37bn in share capital, particularly in the event of a eurozone crisis.

Both no-deal supporters and remainer MPs oppose the settlement.

Sam Gyimah, the Liberal Democrat MP for East Surrey who defected from the Tories over Brexit, said: “This is kissing goodbye to taxpayers’ money and investment with nothing to show for it.”

Rowland added: “We’re saying that we should remove ourselves from the liability.”

 

[Job]

Brexit referendum should never have been called, say majority of voters

No..it shouldnt have been asked, luckily we voted leave..if we had voted remain, that would have been it, sign over the armed forces, adopt the Euro, hand over the stock exchange.
Euro wide taxes followed by massive green taxes on energy, Spanish Fisherman going up the Thames.
Raining cats and dogs.


Its OK remainers, you can thank us later.

 

[dysfunction]

No..it shouldnt have been asked, luckily we voted leave..if we had voted remain, that would have been it, sign over the armed forces, adopt the Euro, hand over the stock exchange.
Euro wide taxes followed by massive green taxes on energy, Spanish Fisherman going up the Thames.
Raining cats and dogs.


Its OK remainers, you can thank us later.

You'll be despised forever.