To wonder what people mean when they say "Oh, I wish they'd just get ON with Brexit!"

[BertrandRussell]

Because I have no idea how they would do that.

The EU is all about common product standards & civil rights.

Brexiters think the EU is about free movement of capital, people & low tariffs. (sigh)

Blink,

If what you say is true, why did the Government not threaten this?

I may be missing something, but that's Brexit information for ya!

If the USA was so good at stopping financial deals with countries & parties they didn't like, then why couldn't they stop the money flowing to Daesh? meh.

@lljkk Or the IRA.

World Cup match is interfering with this debate!

Catch up later maybe.

Because the government doesn't really want to leave. It's perfectly understandable - the government, which includes the civil service has put their life work into building this up.

The issue is the people do not agree with it.

The only problem at the moment is a political one. The people in parliament believe their views are worth more than the people who voted. Until we find a way that parliament represents people accurately we will have a problem.

I am not saying at all that Brexit is a bad thing - but even if it was, it's the people's choice that matters. Every time the EU indicates that no deal is better than being in the EU, what is forgotten is that it c an only be evaluated based on a weighted perception of benefits and costs. If you value border controls over common standards then its a better deal to be out.

It;'s interesting about the EU being about product standards and civil rights - did we not have a way of controlling product standards and civil rights in the UK prior to 1972? Why does the EU get involved in immigration or currency?

The EU wants to be a federal government of a state controlling all of Europe. It has nothing to do with product standards and civil rights. Its original purpose was to ensure France could control Germany's coal.

Bonnie F you have really shown your colours, those that read the sun the daily mail and the Star made the decision did they? I have made a huge point of reading as much as I can on this divisive subject. I am not so bothered about the papers you describe as I like a more serious comment. So far, Daily Telegraph, huge Tory support, huge leaver support= great disillusion in Tory approach. The Guardian, huge remail support. So far no surprises. But here are the ones that are a bit sneaky and I expected to be a bit more balanced, the Times and the Independent. I have always respected these papers but balanced they are not. I do not believe in only reading the papers that reflect your views so I read the others. Sadly where I expected to read both sides of an argument, I dont. The British press can be great , please give us both sides of the debate. This isnt a right or wrong. Tell me why, give me a reasoned discussion, Despite an earlier poster doubt, I spent an age researching and searching for a decision. Both the leave and the remain campaigns were crap, it was down to individuals to read and listen and think. Please do not stoop to imply it was on the back of ignorance, you remainers are better than that. Yes, of course, there were things that caught people out, eg Irelands border. For God's sake let us break free from this schism

In return the UK could also refuse all banking services to the EU - it might focus some minds

They d just go to NY, Singapore etc and it would wreck London as a trustworthy financial centre but the banking industry is not government run or owned so your suggestion cannot happen - unless you are suggesting some sort of Marshall law?

You are showing you ve not a clue what you re talking about.

Who says the money came from the USA? Seems to be an irrelevant point.

What is completely true is what was stated, that people in companies in the US that deal with Iran will be prosecuted.

There is a reason the Swiss changed their privacy laws for banking - it wasn't voluntary!

Couldn't disagree with Blink more... Foundations of EU was about making sure it was in everyone's interest to avoid military conflict.

EU has developed into an institution that ensures that members cooperate rather than compete, that's where civil rights, standarised product rules & free movement of capital came into their remit.

EU is gonna be on our doorstep for decades if not centuries to come. Better to find a good attitude about it.

Blink That's possibly the worst suggestion I've heard so far in the whole debate. You're beginning to sound like a petulant child who's being refused their own way. Can you imagine the aftermath of us just deciding to cut off the EUs banking? Should we throw the threat of Trident in there too, just to make sure they bend to our (probably ridiculous!) demands?

BrandNewHouse

Its never been a choice people have chosen to embrace and in general people are wanting to control their own lives in regions rather than join together. We could have a straight referendum on removing all governments and creating a pure EU one - that would at least be honest!

So it isn't about product standards then - it is about control., As you'll be aware, the reason for controlling steel and coal was to try and prevent Germany causing war and to allow France to have access to fuel.

US sympathisers were/are notorious funders of violent Irish republicans. Big Fail on stopping that.

My own pet Brexiter (teen DS) is not inspiring me with pragmatic vision. He's hoping to have an empire back, with Rhodesia as member, even.

The EC in most areas was about cooperation - as in most areas everyone had to agree. There was generally conventions that even in other areas there would be nothing forced on anyone. This has long changed, so that now its about the majority imposing their view on those who don't want something.

Hamiltoes

I am indicating that if it is find to threaten the UK with no access to medical supplies, I fail to see why it is not equally valid to do the same re banking.

Neither is appropriate - but only one of the above is being proposed.

So, who is being unreasonable?

But blink I think the reason that hasn't been implemented is the feared consequences. The government (I think) worry that your 'clean break' option would have significant effects on the real economy. So they've tried to fudge it....which of course doesn't satisfy the Brexit position you (and many others) espouse. Personally I think we may have to go for the clean break and suffer the consequences or this will rumble on.

Are you pro Brexit Blink66 ? Genuine question, not an attack. I'd admit I was pro Brexit myself if I wasn't so scared of being labelled as thick/racist/Daily Mail reader/ Right wing/General all purpose villain/myriad of other insults/etc etc.

Post Imperial crisis coupled with a heightened sense of hubristic entitlement WRT EU has led us here,

Well also a Eurosceptic Conservative party that Cameron tried to appease. Honestly this is so unnecessary for the vast majority of the NON Etonian crowd.

Honestly, has the UK lost the plot or what now.

I reckon they thought the EU would bow down and capitulate. Because the UK is just SOOOO important to European trade and services.

That is not happening, and rightly so. The UK chose to leave, the rest is history. Bye Bye.

hettie

I appreciate that - but we all understood that prior to the referendum. As I suggested, anyone would think Canada, the US, Australia and other countries fail to work outside the EU.

There will of course be transitional impacts - change is painful,. but people look to the longer term. Otherwise, nobody would have children.

I'd be very much up for real co-operation, but that does not need the EU. As long as two parties both benefit and continue to do so, they will continue to work together. It isn't currently working for there majority of the UK.

Yes, very pro-brexit. Post graduate law really convinced me - most people don't know what the EU is really about.

Out of the World Cup and out of the EU.

The UK may leave without a suitable regulatory frame work on medicines, that is entirely our fault as the Gov would or should have known this.

Just as they should have known about EASA and parts in planes, there are regulatory standards to be up held, maybe we should bar the EU from Heathrow in retaliation?

Thank you Blink, that is very encouraging.