O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[ragingpup]

Well we can both fantasise about how the other is feeling, but neither of us ‘can always tell’ as you claim. You forget that I argue for a living, such that it wouldn’t do for me to be bothered by it. I see the waspishness in your latest post and suspect that you are a bit riled, but maybe you aren’t.

Why you want it to be like this is beyond me.

There is nothing ‘semantic’ about my response to your Davis claim. You were just plain wrong as you now acknowledge (and what do you see as the difference between promised and pledged?). But for your arrogance in post 137, I would have happily ignored it.

I’ve ignored the other ten (nine, surely?) promises/pledges/aims that you say were made by the Tories, because I have neither the time nor the inclination to check them out (and would certainly want to in light of your Davis debacle) and they are irrelevant to where we are now. If you and the Labour Party want to play the ‘who said what and when’ fiddle whilst (the Treaty of) Rome burns, you will have to do so without my accompaniment. I only hope that the Labour Party eventually decides to start acting like it is run by grown-ups.

Dealing with your numbered points:

1. For the reasons that I have set out ad nauseum, I suspect that the withdrawal deal on the table is the best we are going to get. It hurt the EU to offer UK access to the customs union, whilst scrapping the CAP and CFP and ending free movement. I doubt if they will give more.

Again, I must point out that it’s a withdrawal deal not a future relationship deal that is currently on the table – the EU isn’t going to be talking about the detail of a future relationship until after we have left, hence the need for a transition period and backstop. And when they do start talking it will take time, not least because at that point individual EU states are going to be looking to include bits that specifically benefit their interests.

You aren’t being asked to buy a future relationship, because it hasn’t been discussed other than in vague terms. This as much as you are getting at the moment:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...lationship.pdf

2. I will have no more say over what Parliament ultimately agrees by way of a permanent new relationship with the EU than I do over whether the withdrawal deal is accepted. I doubt that the deal you describe would get through Parliament.

3. We don’t have a future deal hence I did not compare it to the Norwegian model. Norway is the 10th largest donor to the EU budget, has accepted the four freedoms and allows access to its fisheries by EU trawlers. It is also required to accept significantly more EU generated law than we would under the terms of the withdrawal agreement.

Norway is a dreadful model largely supported by people who don’t really want to leave, but are willing to go through the motions.

You say in response to question 3: "We don’t have a future deal hence I did not compare it to the Norwegian model. Yet in your previous post you said: "It (May's deal with the EU) is far less restrictive than the Norwegian model that you favour…"

On what basis are you comparing the current deal as "less restrictive than the Norwegian model" if you don't know what that deal is?

[WanChaiMiller]

How does that work, WanChai? The EU is not willing to enter into detailed negotiations about the future relationship until the withdrawal deal is agreed. In practical terms, that means that we will have left before we know what that relationship will look like.

You are arguing for a referendum in the future upon whether to apply to rejoin.

You mean my comment 'free trade deal'.

With respect Im simply quoting what was written on the Leave EU website at the time of the referendum (I copied and pasted it word for word on an earlier post). No idea how it will work - perhaps you should ask Gove, Johnson, Raab, etc why they endorsed it

Except to say I think its totally unworkable and evidence maybe of the Leave Campaign misleading the voter.

[KerrAvon]

You say in response to question 3: "We don’t have a future deal hence I did not compare it to the Norwegian model. Yet in your previous post you said: "It (May's deal with the EU) is far less restrictive than the Norwegian model that you favour…"

On what basis are you comparing the current deal as "less restrictive than the Norwegian model" if you don't know what that deal is?

We know exactly what the proposed withdrawal deal is. It's available on line if you have a few days to spare to read it. It's a withdrawal deal with the intended to be temporary backstop and the political statement that I linked to being the only elements that touch upon a future relationship. I can't make it any clearer for you. You are barking up the wrong tree.

[KerrAvon]

You mean my comment 'free trade deal'.

With respect Im simply quoting what was written on the Leave EU website at the time of the referendum (I copied and pasted it word for word on an earlier post). No idea how it will work - perhaps you should ask Gove, Johnson, Raab, etc why they endorsed it

Except to say I think its totally unworkable and evidence maybe of the Leave Campaign misleading the voter.

Davis tried to discuss the future relationship, but the EU negotiators refused until a withdrawal deal was agreed.

[Exiletyke]

You mean my comment 'free trade deal'.

With respect Im simply quoting what was written on the Leave EU website at the time of the referendum (I copied and pasted it word for word on an earlier post). No idea how it will work - perhaps you should ask Gove, Johnson, Raab, etc why they endorsed it

Except to say I think its totally unworkable and evidence maybe of the Leave Campaign misleading the voter.

Do you think this leaflet was fair & balanced?


https://assets.publishing.service.go...for-the-uk.pdf

[WanChaiMiller]

Davis tried to discuss the future relationship, but the EU negotiators refused until a withdrawal deal was agreed.

This is the copy paste direct from the site... 'We should negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation. We end the supremacy of EU law. We regain control. We stop sending £350 million every week to Brussels and instead spend it on our priorities, like the NHS and science research.'

All Im asking is if 'the people' dont get the deal that Gove, Johnson, etc campaigned on, should this give grounds for a second referendum? (I mean this both ways, Leave or Remain - baring in mind they do not say it is an option to bomb out with no deal and revert to wto tariffs.)

This is not a statement btw, there is a question mark after the sentence.

[KerrAvon]

This is the copy paste direct from the site... 'We should negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation. We end the supremacy of EU law. We regain control. We stop sending £350 million every week to Brussels and instead spend it on our priorities, like the NHS and science research.'

All Im asking is if 'the people' dont get the deal that Gove, Johnson, etc campaigned on, should this give grounds for a second referendum? (I mean this both ways, Leave or Remain - baring in mind they do not say it is an option to bomb out with no deal and revert to wto tariffs.)

This is not a statement btw, there is a question mark after the sentence.

As a statement of intent - a wish list - I think that represents a good outcome for Brexit. The future relationship deal may end up looking like that - we don't know and won't until it's been negotiated (I see the EU may be offering to extend transition until 2022 to allow that deal to be negotiated in the hope that the backstop doesn't have to be triggered).

We will have left by the time the future relationship is settled, so your referendum would have to be upon whether we rejoin.

[WanChaiMiller]

As a statement of intent - a wish list - I think that represents a good outcome for Brexit. The future relationship deal may end up looking like that - we don't know and won't until it's been negotiated (I see the EU may be offering to extend transition until 2022 to allow that deal to be negotiated in the hope that the backstop doesn't have to be triggered).

We will have left by the time the future relationship is settled, so your referendum would have to be upon whether we rejoin.

So, in actual fact, when Brexiteers say they knew what they were voting for, the truth is they didnt.

[WanChaiMiller]

Do you think this leaflet was fair & balanced?


https://assets.publishing.service.go...for-the-uk.pdf

Broadly, yes. Which bit do you disagree with?

[KerrAvon]

I think there are as many visions of Brexit as there were Brexit voters, many of them wholly unrealistic - I was threatened with a ban on Tykes Mad for pointing that out at the time. I was upsetting people apparently. I was just trying to debate the point.

The vote happened and we are where we are. Woe betide the political party that seeks to go back on that. Another referendum is Lib Dem policy and look at how the 2017 GE worked out for them.