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.

To think the only people who want 'Nn Deal' have no idea what this means?

650 replies

KennDodd · 22/01/2019 17:47

And don't believe you if you tell them. Facts and laws just seem to be wafted away as irrelevant.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
ilovemylurcher · 27/01/2019 12:22

For all of those who reckon that they knew exactly what they were voting for- how?
I voted remain but did approach the referendum with an open mind, tried to educate myself on the issues (watched as many TV debates as I could, listened to as much news radio as possible, read widely on the issue) and I certainly did not envisage some of the problems we are currently facing.
I voted remain because leave seemed far too big a gamble. It still is.
And I'm sick of leavers, whenever potential problems are put to them, yelling 'project fear' rather than actually trying to answer with well reasoned facts. (Here's a thought- perhaps there aren't any)

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 12:27

Yes Lurcher such an easy couple of words to trot out ad infinitum. Equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears and singing lalala.

smilethoyourheartisbreaking · 27/01/2019 12:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

surferjet · 27/01/2019 13:33

Ta1kinPeace
I’m happy to ‘just get on with it’ yes.
I’d rather have the WA then no Brexit at all.
It’s a compromise isn’t it.

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 14:02

surferjet
So you are happy that the WA will keep the UK in the Customs union - with all that entails?
excellent

bellinisurge · 27/01/2019 14:03

@surferjet has inspired me to get a countdown app on my phone. Just in case my stomach stops churning Confused

mobyduck · 27/01/2019 15:11

What's WA and what is a neo-liberal?

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 15:16

Withdrawal Agreement

Free market economics

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 15:17

WA is the current agreement that has just been roundly rejected by MPs.

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 15:30

But without the £65 its the Plan B they are going to vote on again

the people are not allowed a second vote
MPs are going to get lots and lots of votes
till they vote the right way Hmm

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 15:34

Ta1kinPeace is there absolutely no chance of a PV now?

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 15:42

Have you read what the Electoral Commission are saying today ....

and how would you react if the vote turned out to be 52:48 for Leave again ?

mobyduck · 27/01/2019 15:52

*Have you read what the Electoral Commission are saying today ....

and how would you react if the vote turned out to be 52:48 for Leave again*

If we had a PV, we could not have the red bus again (it's been rumbled), and no MP could say it will be the easiest deal in history or that we can have our cake and eat it- at least not with a straight face.
The farmers will have had a thought about EU subsidies and border delays and our fishermen would know they were about to be shafted.

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 15:54

mobyduck
and no MP could say it will be the easiest deal in history or that we can have our cake and eat it- at least not with a straight face.
Bojo / Farage / Liam Fox / JRM / Farage / McVey / Hoey
you really think they would not campaign on
Nasty EU stopping us getting what we want
really ??

PoutySprout · 27/01/2019 16:01

and how would you react if the vote turned out to be 52:48 for Leave again

They’d just need every “voter” to complete a short reasoning/IQ test and adjust results accordingly. Votes by those of poor intelligence worth less than those who understand stuff.

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 16:06

Pouty
There are some very intelligent leave supporters.
Be careful what you wish for.

PoutySprout · 27/01/2019 16:16

I’m yet to meet one that can evidence potential benefit in leaving.

PoutySprout · 27/01/2019 16:16

Or, in fact, name more than 2 EU originated laws correctly.

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 16:20

Ta1kinPeace I wasn't saying I wanted a PV just thought the idea was dust and making sure.

Ta1kinPeace · 27/01/2019 16:25

pouty
I’m yet to meet one that can evidence potential benefit in leaving.
Ah, you need to meet the right ones Wink
I know several who are looking to a weakening of employment and environmental legislation increasing their profits Grin

mobyduck · 27/01/2019 20:56

From today's Guardian:

UK cannot simply trade on WTO terms after no-deal Brexit, say experts
UK may face seven-year wait for frictionless trade under WTO rules if it crashes out of EU
The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.
The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule: 20 over goods and three over services.

To make it more complicated, there are no “default terms” Britain can crash out on, Howard said, while at the same time, the UK has been blocked by WTO members from simply relying on the EU’s “schedule” – its existing tariffs and tariff-free trade quotas.

The second hurdle is the sheer volume of domestic legislation that would need to be passed before being able to trade under WTO rules: there are nine statutes and 600 statutory instruments that would need to be adopted.

The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, Howard said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said.

“Basic maths shows that we will run out of time but any gap in our system will create uncertainty or conflict,” said Howard. “Some of these regimes carry penalties such as fines – even criminal offences in some sectors.”

Unless there is an extension to article 50, both these hurdles will need to be crossed by 29 March. This, said Howard, was an impossible task. “Negotiating and ratifying the international free trade deals with the rest of the world alone could take over seven years,” she said.

“A no-deal Brexit could double prices for some products like meat and dairy. There is also a greater risk of trade disputes and sanctions, resulting in reduced market access for UK businesses.

“It’s not just about money,” she said. “We are dependent on imports for a lot of things that we don’t make any more or don’t make enough of, or simply cannot make as they are patented or subject to rules of origin – like lifesaving drugs, radioactive isotopes for MRI scans, medical equipment, chemicals, electricity, petrol, even milk. Shortages and delays could cause panic buying or even civil unrest.”

BollocksToBrexit · 27/01/2019 23:06

To make it more complicated, there are no “default terms” Britain can crash out on

Does anyone know what happens in this scenario? I can't find anything that says what happens if schedules\tariffs aren't sorted. Does it mean you cannot trade with any WTO members?

Whatdoiwanttohear · 27/01/2019 23:09

Thank you Moby I've taken 3 screenshots of The Guardian article so that I can refer to it on Wed when I see my lovely friend who says she voted Remain but quite frankly I don't believe her, we'll just fall back on WTO rules she always says, so that will bore her into submission I suspect.

Buteo · 28/01/2019 10:03

I can't find anything that says what happens if schedules\tariffs aren't sorted. Does it mean you cannot trade with any WTO members?

The UK is a WTO member in it's own right. It has submitted its schedules (its proposed tariffs and quotas) for goods to the WTO - the schedule for services was only submitted last month.

Info from Peter Ungphakorn (ex WTO) and Dmitry Grozoubinski (ex WTO negotiator):

Ungphakorn : Its [UK] draft schedule literally copies and pastes all the tariffs from the EU’s goods schedule. They cover about 685 pages of the 715. Even where an EU tariff is expressed in euros (per tonne or whatever quantity), Britain has made no attempt to convert these into pounds.

So the regular tariffs should face few or no objections ... That leaves 100 or so tariff quotas (the EU counts 124 on agricultural products and 18 on others). And here, the UK has admitted it’s likely to have to negotiate with other WTO members. They are on 25 pages out of the 715-page document.

Grozoubinski : The WTO Director-General will only certify a schedule when there are no objections. Even a single objection is enough to prevent certification.

The UK can trade just fine on an uncertified schedule. Having an uncertified schedule just means at least one WTO Member doesn't think that schedule is an accurate representation of your commitments. At worst could signal objective Members plan to take a dispute against you in the WTO some time in the future, but even that is hardly fatal.

mobyduck · 02/02/2019 03:03

WhoWantsTo Know What I mean to say is that it's not that they don't know what it means- they want it anyway

You mean they really want to bankrupt the country? Blimey, I didn't know feelings ran that high.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page