Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The whole shit show can hardly be blamed on Theresa May can it

609 replies

dawnacorns · 15/11/2018 13:12

I'm hardly her number one fan but I can't see how getting rid of her is the answer. They just don't seem to know what they're doing. It's an absolute mess whichever way you look at it.

OP posts:
JediJim · 17/11/2018 23:26

Why do the vote leavers need a plan silentisla? Isn’t that the job of Theresa May?Isn’t that what’s she’s paid to do? Wasn’t it her that volunteered for that job?

Peregrina · 17/11/2018 23:36

The EU wasn’t willing to reform. When David Cameron went off to Europe to ask for changes they told him to do one.
He actually got most of what he wanted. Yet another special deal, for the country which already had the best deal.

There’s a big flaw in the whole Brexit and racist argument. Think about it, we can put limits on skilled Asian and Black migrants from non EU countries coming here who are predominately Asian or black, but have no limits on EU migrants, who are predominantly white.

Nice argument but it doesn't wash. Non EU immigration is a Westminster policy. We could let the whole of the rest of the world in if we chose, and in fact non EU immigration is higher. Guess who was the architect of the Hostile Environment? Non other than Theresa May. It's Freedom of Movement of Labour as far as the EU goes, and we could throw people out after 3 months if they don't find work, as Belgium for one does, but UK politicians chose not to implement that rule. Blair also totally misjudged the number of East Europeans who would want to come here.

The EU has been such a convenient excuse for politicians, especially the Tory party. Now that May has, despite her own appeasement of the loony right wing of the party, managed to cobble together some sort of deal, most Leavers are still not happy.

HateIsNotGood · 17/11/2018 23:36

Fish:

Apparently the UK prefers EU-caught fish and the EU prefers UK-caught fish. Do they really? Really? I would hypothesize that this 'factoid' is based on 'flawed' research. Even if true, most of the fish eaten in the UK is covered in batter and fried, with 'cheaper' fish readily available and eaten. Therefore, if UK-caught fish was the cheapest, most readily available fish, it would be consumed without much winging.

The UK is a Coastal Country, unlike France, Germany and Spain, whilst having Coasts - they don't have as much proportionally as the UK does. Fishing IS important to many communities; it may have been sold off by business and governments to date, but so many people live by the Coast and many would have been involved in the Fishing Industry if it still existed.

Reason 1 for leaving the EU.

That's my lot now for t'night, it's late.

Peregrina · 17/11/2018 23:39

Why do the vote leavers need a plan silentisla?

If Leavers had bothered to engage and tell their MPs what they wanted, it's just possible, assuming May chose to listen, that she might have negotiated something people were happy with. I agree, 'chose to listen' is a key statement here, and May doesn't chose to listen.

Peregrina · 17/11/2018 23:45

Therefore, if UK-caught fish was the cheapest, most readily available fish, it would be consumed without much winging.

No, the sales go to where the markets are. We tend to prefer Norwegian cod, and the Iberian penninsula in particular prefers things like squid. Tastes admittedly are changing - calamari sounds much nicer than squid, and people now eat sushi which was unheard of a generation ago.

Years ago a Danish friend told me how surprised he was that the country didn't eat as much fish as his country, which is predominantly made up of islands.

BTW Westminster is the one who allowed the fishing quotas to be sold, to mainly Dutch boats.

Imissgmichael · 17/11/2018 23:50

I voted out as I have I had a right to do. It isn’t my job to sort it out. Did I land us in this mess? Good grief stop being so cowardly. But, but, we need to stop in because the EU is god. For goodness sake get a grip.

HateIsNotGood · 18/11/2018 00:00

Pere btw, we already know about the 'sell outs', but fish is fish and we'll eat what we're given, when we eat fish, covered in batter and fried.
Your Danish friend can probably rest assured that cheap fish will probably highlight more on the UK Menu in the next few years.

Think of the carbon footprint saving too.

Peregrina · 18/11/2018 00:13

I would have said that I suspect we won't eat different fish, but the increased popularity of sushi would have astounded earlier generations. Raw fish? You must be joking!

You might know about the Westminster sell off of fishing rights Hatels, but a significant number don't and it suited the Government not to disabuse them.

genius1308 · 18/11/2018 00:15

It really frustrates me when all the remainers believe that they are some kind of Oracles, who are obviously the only people with an ounce of education and who know exactly what's going to happen when/if we leave the EU. And they treat all leavers like uneducated, racist imbeciles who are completely unable to research/think/not be swayed by the media. I've met remainers who have no idea why they voted remain 'I just did' ! And I've met leavers who think if we leave the EU then the UK will be 'uncontaminated by foreigners, and we'll have an extra 350million for the NHS'. Both sides are completely absurd, and contain people at opposite ends of the spectrum . I'm not racist, I believe in freedom of movement etc and I never believed he NHS would get an extra 350 million a week(every politician lies at every election and no one ever seems to pull them up about it)...but I did vote leave. The EU has morphed into something that it wasn't originally designed for and the model, as it is now, is no longer sustainable imo. Up till about 10 years ago it worked relatively well I think. Half of the members put in more money and half took out more money but on the whole it pretty much evened itself out. But in the past decade I feel it's become less and less workable as more countries have been allowed to join. The problem is 28 countries are now part of the EU, of those 28 only 10 put in more than they take out. That leaves 18 countries taking out more! Of those 10 countries, only 5 put in substantially more than they take, the UK being the 3rd highest contributor. Surely it's obvious that this model was never going to be sustainable long term. When Cameron went to the EU originally, and his requests for change were denied, I honestly think the 'original' EU would have considered his requests and could see what was happening. German, France, Italy, Spain (all who pay in more than they take out) could see the problem and I feel agreed with what Cameron was saying. Public feeling in these countries is similar to ours. Germany, France and Italy especially, who have a much larger influx of immigrants than us. The problem is there's now more financially unstable countries in the EU and they would never agree to 'reducing benefits/housing/health care' to migrants from their country to the UK. I do have to amend my pp and say I actually do agree that the EU would take us back with open arms. Of course they would, we are the 3rd highest financial contributor to the EU pot. When we leave that's going to be a lot more pressure on those 9 countries that are propping up the other 18!

genius1308 · 18/11/2018 00:18

And to those saying 'no other countries are jumping to trade with us', of course they're not! They're legally not allowed to until we have left the EU.

genius1308 · 18/11/2018 00:28

I think we should maybe ask if the former Australian prime minister is free? He seems to know what he's talking about Wink

Tony Abbott
27 October 2018 9:00 AM

"It’s pretty hard for Britain’s friends, here in Australia, to make sense of the mess that’s being made of Brexit. The referendum result was perhaps the biggest-ever vote of confidence in the United Kingdom, its past and its future. But the British establishment doesn’t seem to share that confidence and instead looks desperate to cut a deal, even if that means staying under the rule of Brussels. Looking at this from abroad, it’s baffling: the country that did the most to bring democracy into the modern world might yet throw away the chance to take charge of its own destiny.

Let’s get one thing straight: a negotiation that you’re not prepared to walk away from is not a negotiation — it’s surrender. It’s all give and no get. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate Britain’s EU membership, he was sent packing because Brussels judged (rightly) that he’d never actually back leaving. And since then, Brussels has made no real concessions to Theresa May because it judges (rightly, it seems) that she’s desperate for whatever deal she can get.

The EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project. Its position, now, is that there’s only one ‘deal’ on offer, whereby the UK retains all of the burdens of EU membership but with no say in setting the rules. The EU seems to think that Britain will go along with this because it’s terrified of no deal. Or, to put it another way, terrified of the prospect of its own independence.

But even after two years of fearmongering and vacillation, it’s not too late for robust leadership to deliver the Brexit that people voted for. It’s time for Britain to announce what it will do if the EU can’t make an acceptable offer by March 29 next year — and how it would handle no deal. Freed from EU rules, Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. So why on earth would it not work just as well for the world’s fifth-largest economy?

A world trade Brexit lets Britain set its own rules. It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards. That means no border controls for goods coming from Europe to Britain. You don’t need to negotiate this: just do it. If Europe knows what’s in its own best interests, it would fully reciprocate in order to maintain entirely free trade and full mutual recognition of standards right across Europe.

Next, the UK should declare that Europeans already living here should have the right to remain permanently — and, of course, become British citizens if they wish. This should be a unilateral offer. Again, you don’t need a deal. You don’t need Michel Barnier’s permission. If Europe knows what’s best for itself, it would likewise allow Britons to stay where they are.

Third, there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare. And with a foreign worker’s tax on the employer, to make sure anyone coming in would not be displacing British workers.

Fourth, no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. If Britain was getting its fair share, these would balance out; and if Britain wasn’t getting its fair share, it’s the EU that should be paying Britain.

Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland. Britain wouldn’t be imposing tariffs on European goods, so there’s no money to collect. The UK has exactly the same product standards as the Republic, so let’s not pretend you need to check for problems we all know don’t exist. Some changes may be needed but technology allows for smart borders: there was never any need for a Cold War-style Checkpoint Charlie. Irish citizens, of course, have the right to live and work in the UK in an agreement that long predates EU membership.

Of course, the EU might not like this British leap for independence. It might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. The worst it can get? We’re talking levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound (which would have the added bonus of making British goods more competitive everywhere).

UK officialdom assumes that a deal is vital, which is why so little thought has been put into how Britain might just walk away. Instead, officials have concocted lurid scenarios featuring runs on the pound, gridlock at ports, grounded aircraft, hoarding of medicines and flights of investment. It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum.

As a former prime minister of Australia and a lifelong friend of your country, I would say this: Britain has nothing to lose except the shackles that the EU imposes on it. After the courage shown by its citizens in the referendum, it would be a tragedy if political leaders go wobbly now. Britain’s future has always been global, rather than just with Europe. Like so many of Britain’s admirers, I want to see this great country seize this chance and make the most of it.

Tony Abbott served as Prime Minister of Australia from 2013 to 2015"

Peregrina · 18/11/2018 00:31

But the UK was one pushing for wider expansion and bringing in the East European countries - probably before their economies were ready. The Tory party should at least own that they are the architects of some EU problems. Blair didn't help by totally underestimating the number of E European citizens who would want to come. He could have put a stay on the numbers, and I suspect many would have eventually preferred to go to Germany rather than the UK.

Which countries are going to trade with us, exactly? With China, I suspect it's going to be decidedly one way, and ditto the US. Germany and Belgium manage to trade with China already, so it can't be the EU stopping them - it's more likely that they have something that the Chinese want to buy. One thing that bedevils us is that we are good at inventing things, but not good at capitalising on those inventions.

Peregrina · 18/11/2018 00:33

BIL lived in Australia for many years, he loathes Abbott and was glad to see the back of him.

Annandale · 18/11/2018 01:21

I have stopped feeling anything much for TM. She is who she is. And that is the person who formed a government by making an agreement with the DUP, and announced it without the trifling constitutional convention of going to the Palace first. And none of the constitutional leavers such as Rees-Mogg raised so much as a tweet about this act of, erm, well, treason actually.

Stripybeachbag · 18/11/2018 01:51

I think we should maybe ask if the former Australian prime minister is free? He seems to know what he's talking about wink

Oh dear. Tony Abbott was kicked out after 2 years. Theresa May is more "successful" than him as the arguably the most hated PM in recent Australian history.

Tony Abbott's wise words:

EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project The EU has been trying to help the UK. If it wanted to "punish" the UK it wouldn't offer a withdrawal agreement. But then most people don't seem to have grasped this.

Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. Tony Abbott not being in power any longer has may be missed the fact that Australia is one of the nation's objecting the UK's proposed terms in regard to the WTO rules.

there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare That is already the case. For some reason, the UK has chosen not to enforce it. So TA agrees with the EU then.

no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. The EU should assume UK property and liabilities! That would sit well with leavers.

EU [...] might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. [...] levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound So a crash in sterling is going to happen according to TA and it will be a good thing (according to him).

It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum. A no-deal situation is totally different (and an incorrect interpretation) and very easy to ignore if you are sitting on the opposite side of the world.

Like so many of Britain’s admirers, I want to see this great country seize this chance and make the most of it. I would be very careful of anything that TA wishes. Not totally sure that he has the UK citizens welfare at heart. He didn't for his own country.

Simply put: If Putin/Trump wants the UK out of the EU, then its probably not a good idea. Tony Abbott could join those two in that sentence.

JediJim · 18/11/2018 06:25

When the EU was essentially made of up about ten countries it worked because these countries were all economically very similar. France, Germany, Luxembourg, Denmark etc etc. Then since about 2004 Poland joined and in 2014 Romania joined. Some of the EU countries contribute very little economically, leaving us ( the UK) to do large amounts of funding. It’s like me paying £100 pm for a gym membership but my friend next door paying £25 pm.
David Cameron when questioned in 2016 on a live debate refused to answer the question whether he would veto Turkey joining the EU. He wouldn’t give a straight answer, like yes he would veto it.
The whole 350 million on the NHS written on a bus, well the people making that pledge were not in a position to do it. Theresa May was a remainer, had we had a leaver PM then maybe this pledge could be implemented.

SonEtLumiere · 18/11/2018 07:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SonEtLumiere · 18/11/2018 07:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Helmetbymidnight · 18/11/2018 07:22

None of the leavers wanted to do the graft - and apparently leavers didn’t even think it would happen.
What a way of thinking: - it will never happen so I’ll vote/campaign for it. ?

Doesn't anyone remember that TM only triggered A50 after a lot of pressure to do so from the EU?

you genuinely think she only triggered it because she felt she had no other option?

Blimey- if your opinion is based on that article, describing a warm and friendly breakfast, she is more easily swayed than anyone thought. A leaf would have more staying power.

merrymouse · 18/11/2018 07:30

Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland.

There is under WTO rules.

merrymouse · 18/11/2018 07:33

It’s like me paying £100 pm for a gym membership but my friend next door paying £25 pm.

People do pay different rates to access gyms.

LonelyandTiredandLow · 18/11/2018 07:44

A leaver acquaintance said to me last night - "I don't care if we are poorer, I've been poor before!" Shock
Not with kids he bloody hasn't! He's got 3 of them and thinks this way! Imagine saying that about anything else - No no darling, we should get that diamond encrusted car and starve for the next 50 years. I do know we can't drive it but dammit, it's what I said we wanted.
Any leaver arguments on this thread all make out the EU have somehow treated us unfairly. We knew what they were going to concede from the start - they were very clear about no cherry picking. We chose to spend 2 years attempting to cherry pick despite this.

merrymouse · 18/11/2018 07:45

It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards.

This sounds very like staying in the customs union and single market. However without a formal deal between the U.K. and the EU every other country in the world would assert their right to trade with the U.K. on the same terms.

lljkk · 18/11/2018 08:07

yeah, that's so true. I pay £20/month for standard swimming membership. If you sign up as a 'new customer' you can get black Friday annual deals (£12/month or even less). You have to have a new email address each time except less year they didn't bother (says friend with the BF membership). To do the BF deal I need to cancel my membership on the right day & then renew with a different email addy & remember when BF is. Might have a gap when I can't swim at all for days or weeks.

Pffft. Can't be arsed.

lljkk · 18/11/2018 08:14

No divorce settlement would mean nobody ever trusted any agreement that Britain ever made again. Neither would any corporation trust anything UK govt told them.

Part of the divorce deal is state pension arrangements. No deal would mean Brits who paid lots of €€€€ into other EU country state pension schemes would get nothing back.

Oz doesn't have land borders with anyone, or anywhere with a history like Norn.

Swipe left for the next trending thread