What exactly is a "Soft Brexit"?

[optionalrationale]

Isn't the notion of a "Soft Brexit" just a forlorn hope that "Brexit Somehow Means Remain"?

See this
Today 21:29 Figmentofmyimagination

It's not my concern what it entails

You're for it... but you are unwilling or unable to articulate what "it" is?

You please Remainers by not choosing any option that risks the uk's economic stability and prosperity. There must shurely be an option that does not cause harm to the UK economy, because otherwise we wouldn't have been put in this position by our esteemed Leaders.

It's not up to my to 'articulate' what it entails - you broke it, you fix it, as they say.

Neverknowing
Thanks for the link.. so "Soft Brexit" is...

This approach would leave the UK's relationship with the EU as close as possible to the existing arrangements, and is preferred by many Remainers.

The UK would no longer be a member of the EU and would not have a seat on the European Council. It would lose its MEPs and its European Commissioner. But, it would keep unfettered access to the European single market.

Goods and services would be traded with the remaining EU states on a tariff-free basis and financial firms would keep their passporting rights to sell services and operate branches in the EU. Britain would remain within the EU's customs union, meaning that exports would not be subject to border checks.

National models for this sort of deal include Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, which are not members of the EU but have access to the single market by being part of the European Economic Area.

In return, these countries must make payments into EU budgets and accept the "four freedoms" of movement of goods, services, capital and people. They are subject to EU law through the Luxembourg-based EFTA Court. Switzerland has a similar arrangement through a series of regularly updated treaties.

It is likely that a "soft Brexit" deal would insist on Britain observing the four freedoms, meaning continued free access for European nationals to work and settle in the UK

So what a "Soft Brexit" is in reality is the *Status Quo without any MEPs, without a seat on the European Council and without our one European commissioner.

How would any party "sell" this as a good deal?

Today 21:39 Figmentofmyimagination

It's not up to my to 'articulate' what it entails

So you are for something (Soft Brexit), but you are unable or unwilling to say what that something is. Are you by any chance on Timmy's campaign team?

OP you answered your own question. It means:

• membership of the customs union
• access to the single market
• freedom of movement

Actually I told you exactly what I am 'for' - an outcome that does not cause economic harm to the uk.

'So what a "Soft Brexit" is in reality is the *Status Quo without any MEPs, without a seat on the European Council and without our one European commissioner.

How would any party "sell" this as a good deal?'

It's not. It's shit. But since the Status Quo involves rocking all over the world, sorry, involves trading with our nearest neighbours on less diabolically awful terms than otherwise, if we have to eat a shit sandwich, it's the kind of shit that still contains some small amount of nutrition, i.e. a few people to actually keep the economy turning over

A Hard Brexit is the kind of shit that a 90 year old with long-term constipation would produce, i.e. a drastic slowdown in our economy.

So what a "Soft Brexit" is in reality is the Status Quo without any MEPs, without a seat on the European Council and without our one European commissioner.*

Not exactly. This is from an EU factsheet about the EEA (the grouping Norway belongs to):

"The limits of the EEA

The EEA Agreement does not establish binding provisions in all sectors of the internal market or in other policies under the EU Treaties. In particular, its binding provisions do not concern:

the common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy 
the customs union;
the common trade policy;
the common foreign and security policy;
the field of justice and home affairs  or
the economic and monetary union (EMU) "

Today 22:01 Figmentofmyimagination

Actually I told you exactly what I am 'for' - an outcome that does not cause economic harm to the UK

in your opinion.... but what would you commit us in order to bring this about?

Today 21:58 MajesticWhine

OP you answered your own question. It means: - freedom of movement

Do you realistically think this is going to happen?

Er, no I don't think it will happen.
This thread has a feel of trying to start a fight in an empty room.

Today 22:01 annandale

It's shit. We have to eat a shit sandwich, it's the kind of shit that still contains some small amount of nutrition. A Hard Brexit is the kind of shit that a 90 year old with long-term constipation would produce.

You're being very, very subtle. But I am detecting an ever so slight hint (and I might be being a smidge oversensitive here), that you might not have been let's say jumping with joy on June 24th last year.

Are there any specifics you can share to illustrate your story of eating varieties of shit?

You were the one who said that a soft Brexit wasn't a good deal. What did you mean?

MajesticWhine Thats normally the OP's reason to start a thread, the OP has previous for this

Today 22:35 MajesticWhine

Er, no I don't think it will happen. This thread has a feel of trying to start a fight in an empty room.

Which is why I started the thread with the words "forlorn hope".. You're admitting and accepting that "Soft Brexit" has a snowball's chance in hell.

Today 22:49 annandale
You were the one who said that a soft Brexit wasn't a good deal. What did you mean?

That (from what I can glean beyond the stories of "eating shit from a constipated 90 year old) is that "Soft Brexit" is all the pain of EU membership but with even less influence than we had before

Today 22:07 GlassOfPort

The Norwegian people have rejected EU membership twice.

What say does Norway have over EU rules?
None. Norway has representatives in EU institutions, but they have no decision-making power in how EU rules are drafted. The country has been granted participation rights, but no voting rights, in several of the union’s programmes, bodies and initiatives, including the European Defence Agency, Frontex, Europol and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction

This thread has a feel of trying to start a fight in an empty room.

Standard operating procedure ... Posts about 50 times a day, mostly goady and content-free.

I agree with figment. Avoiding economic harm has to be the priority now - somehow. The EEA ship has probably sailed anyway.

Disagreeing with or challenging Remnants of Remain makea you a "Goady Fucker". If you want to participate in this thread keep it on topic and perhaps imagine Junkers has imposed a tariff on ad hominem. I have neither the time or opportunity to "post 50 times a day" - not that that is illegal or falls foul of the European Court of Human Rights.

So what we are establishing (very quickly) is that Remainers are unwilling or unable to specify the components of "Soft Brexit" and hold on to some vague notion of Avoiding Economic Harm in their opinion.

If you can't / won't say what it (Soft Brexit) is, how can you be "for" it?

It is really just an attempt by Remain (after the Referendum defeat, the successful Gina Miller legal challenge, the overwhelming vote in Parliament, the triggering of Article 50) to try to get us to Remain after all but now under a flimsy banner of "Look, we have reexamined all the options, and believe us, the option that will do least economic harm is if we kinda sorta stay in. We're being ever so reasonable and considerate and this is a truly great compromise".

I understand now why Remainers hate the phrase "Brexit means Brexit"

There have been a number of substantive responses about what a soft brexit could look like.

But you're not interested in them, just in picking an argument.

It strikes me as fundamentally odd that someone as obsessed with brexit as you are should be unclear about the different brexit options nearly a year after the referendum.

Conclusion: goady thread started to pick a fight.

I'm happy to have a substantive, non goady discussion about different soft brexit options, although realistically there are not many. Soft brexit implies continued single market membership, but may or may not include membership of the EU customs union.

I'm happy to have a substantive, non goady discussion about different soft brexit options, although realistically there are not many

Good. So am I and I agree.

The only examples of Single Market Membership (but not full EU membership) are Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein - all of whom have FOM and still pay hefty fees into the EU coffers but with no voting rights but still have to comply with all EU regulations (including bananas). Turkey is in the Customs Union, no FOM, but being in the EU customs union means it is not free to negotiate its own independent trade deals outside the EU..

If you agree that the Norway Model and the Turkey Model are unlikely, this only leaves the Canada model...

A negotiated trade deal between the EU and us as a third country
Not a member of the EU
Not a member of the EU Customs Union
Not paying into EU budgets
No Freedom of Movement

is that Soft enough? It seems pretty Hard to me. But I prefer it that way.

Ok hard and soft Brexit explained so you can stop posting threads asking:

You break up with a longterm boyfriend. It was your decision. You are tied to a mortgage and neither of you can afford to move out at the moment. Plus you have shared friends, and a dog.

Is the smart way to proceed:
A. Sit down and have an amiable chat about how to share space. And divvy up the cookery books and CDs, try to come up with a rota for who has the car which days and try to remain on friendly terms
Or B. Call him a cunt, burn his clothes on the front lawn, smash his CDs and then try to live together?

There have been a number of substantive responses about what a soft brexit could look like.

But you're not interested in them, just in picking an argument.

There have been a number of substantive responses about what a soft brexit could look like.

But you're not interested in them, just in picking an argument.