Tory Voting Brexiters, please tell me what you think

[ShintyFartMuscle]

Ok first of all, hands up, I am abroad and so I feel I'm not getting a true picture of the feelings in the UK now, and I have found there are more MNetters with differing views and so I thought it would be good to ask here, and I do so most respectfully.

My question is what is it about the Tories and Teresa May that make you think they will be the best at negotiating Brexit?

From where I am, very,very far away, I know, JC has gone from a rank outsider, despised by half his party and yet he has still gained massive ground, and made people feel some hope in the future. That feels like the kind of person that could negotiate well for a divided nation too.

On the other hand, TM has gone from a stonking position, way ahead in the polls, and lost it, U turns, and well just not looking like she is strong in debate, and not going to be strong in negotiating.

So what would the Tories bring to the table as it were?

Generally speaking the Conservatives have more of a commercial brain than Labour MP That used to be the case and, still is in some notable cases, such as Anna Soubrey and Hammond. However May and her Brexiteers and the other 63 MPs that form the hard right Brexit What's App crew are of an entirely different Tory school of behaviour that looks down on trade and does not see the need to engage. Business leaders are beyond frustrated at their refusal to acknowledge the risks, or to listen to anything that they don't want to hear, and the continuing platitudes and lack of substance to their Brexit strategy. The latter is in a huge contrast to the EU who are now publishing not just their red lines and the proposed structure to the negotiations but are now deep into the detail of the issues that will need resolution. So they are quietly putting together their plans to move business activities overseas which by the way includes my DH and I. I am not sure where you are OP but in every country I am familiar with in the world they have been watching developments with shock and incomprehension at the sheer ineptitude and in a lot of cases already looking to capitalise on the opportunities it represents to take economic advantage of the UKs situation.

The delusion she would negotiate well has been fed by the media employing all kinds of completely inappropriate metaphors for the Brexit negotiations. From metaphors of waging war to metaphors of playing poker, they all characterise the process as binary and aggressive.

The General Public rumbled her at the election - hence the lack of majority and plummeting ratings. Jeremy Corbyn, as again we saw in the election, would at least appear to be listening.

I don't think TM will be the best at negotiating Brexit, but I think she, or almost anyone else (Diane Abbott excepted) will do a far superior job to negotiating Brexit than JC.

JC is popular right now with the general public, especially with the young (who have never experienced socialism). He promised a lot of groups a lot of things at the election, but I personally doubt his ability to deliever any of them on the basis that i think companies will register abroad and the wealth creators will leave the country if he was to win. So, he'd have lots of net takers to satify but not many net contributors to tax.

As to who should negotate brexit, I think Michael Gove has a good brain and is naturally charming, or the DUP, who clearly have the much needed negotiating skills. Even if the DUP don't get to actually negotiate it (and I think that's extremely unlikely), then I hope they'll at elast mentor David davis, or whoever does.

I think Michael Gove has a good brain and is naturally charming,
Ha, ha, the man who set the whole of the Education world against him!

I will grant you the DUP. May - how much do you want? DUP - A billion will do for a starter.

Mistigri

I agree that there is this intra party division on the Single Market, whether we should stay in or out is exactly that, a less than productive division, as the EU rules and statements before and after the Referendum result, effectively decided that for us – so why is this still a major issue?

And on this I despair on UK politicians, who we trust to make our laws, when many do not understand what a deficit is, how it increases national debt, or WHY we should even try to stay in the Single Market.

The EU clearly thought this could be used as ‘leverage’ to extort huge sums of money out of the UK to fund what is effectively an EU experiment to transfer funds from larger more economically successful economies in Europe to the small and emerging ones, with what, 5 more currently in the wings, including Bosnia.

The 4 ‘freedoms’ of the Single Market should be looked at on a UK perspective to work out NOW, a YEAR after the Brexit vote came in, as to why we apparently NEED to stay in at the EUs price;

The UKs vote on ‘the freedom of movement of citizens’ is in, and will always penalize the more successful nations workforce and putting annually unknown pressures on services, plus compressing pay rates, as how can with over 500 million citizens can UK labour conditions ‘tighten’ enough to naturally push pay rates higher?

Socialist MPs without a commercial little grey cell, who just want to push pay UK rates higher reducing Productivity (jobs) further, while COMPLAINING our Productivity is too, low, should not be in charge of our economy. IMHO.

Clearly this has put the EUs back up, as the UK was an employment safety valve for their citizens, while they naval gaze how to create sustainable jobs not funded by governments/tax payers.

The ‘freedom of movement of both capital and services’ is also very important to the EU countries that rely on the City’s global, 24-hour, Investment Banking function, but they want to keep their Head Offices here, and so have ALREADY chosen to relocate as much as their business to EU member countries as required, approximately 20-25%.

In ‘services’ its pretty similar, and while the UK relies more on ‘services’ than exporting say white electrical goods, the more services the UK sells to the rest of the world, once it stops relying so much on the now several year stagnant EU for our future prosperity, the less this ‘loss’ will matter.

In ‘freedom of selling goods’ this is also a cross boarder passporting concern, but if any additional costs to the UK, if the UK is saving £10-13billion in net EU contributions a year, and/or does not pay a huge Euro 50 to 100 billion invoice less divorce bill – the UK can lower their taxes to compensate them, that the commercially ignorant, penal taxes reliant Corbyn calls, ‘being a tax have’. Lol

In conclusion; if MPs want to disrupt our Brexit timetable and terms, they should both understand WHY they insist we stay in the Single Market (and a Customs Union that would stop us doing trade deals elsewhere in the world) - and explain it to the electorate, that around 70% now just wants the government to get on with it.

Perigrina
MP Dodds from the DUP stood up in parliament the other day and mentioned that the DUP had been approached by both Labour and the SNP from before the 2010 general election onwards to form some kind of coalition – so lets get this in some 2017 political perspective, as whether the Conservatives or Labour were the largest party, the 10 DUP Westminster votes were crucial to government the UK for this parliament.

The DUP are a unionist party who want the UK to succeed, while the in bed with Labour under any idiot of a leader SNP, desperately wants to leave the UK and would have exploited a coalition with Labour to ‘fatten up’ Scotland for departure, at the rest of the UK taxpayer expense.

So if the SNP 2015 demands of extra £billions of spending, and £180 billion of extra UK borrowing for Scotland under Salmond was any guide to Sturgeons demands – I know which UK country would have been worth THEIR cash demands, to support a main Westminster party.

Peregrina - i think that observation needs to be set against the debating question: can an education secretary be effective about raising standards without angering the teachers? I'd contend that if you are education secretary, and the teaching unions don't hate you, then you are either implementing their agenda or you are so ineffective that you aren't bothering them.

I agree that there is this intra party division on the Single Market, whether we should stay in or out is exactly that, a less than productive division, as the EU rules and statements before and after the Referendum result, effectively decided that for us – so why is this still a major issue?

The EU haven't decided anything of the sort; there is still, I think, a window in which a soft Brexit (i.e. remaining inside the SM) could be negotiated, although that window is closing. All the EU have done is to reiterate that if the British government refuses to accept the four freedoms and ECJ oversight, then single market membership is simply incompatible with British objectives.

As for the "Brexit bill" there is no "EU position" that I am aware of, other than that the UK will need to meet previously-engaged commitments.

I think many MPs - particularly those who are, as you would term it, "commercially minded" - have a very good idea of why SM membership is a good idea, as do many Tory voters who work in financial services or in manufacturing.

Gove is useless. Negotiating complex agreements like Brexit needs someone with grasp of detail and respect for expertise, an ability to compromise, and a big dose of pragmatism. I can barely think of a cabinet member less well equipped to negotiate Brexit except perhaps Boris.

Hammond on other hand might be a safe pair of hands. I hear good things about him from colleagues who have worked with him, and in particular about his grasp of detail.

Re the DUP and their famed "negotiating skills" - this is bollocks. Anyone can negotiate a good deal if they have their counterparty over a barrel, and if (as in the DUP's case) they are a bunch of rapacious ideologues with a crash-and-burn mentality. Try that with the EU and you will end up not just over a barrel, but inside it, somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, with no lifeboat in sight and the sharks circling.

TBH I don't think we'll get a deal from the EU that's worth having, irrespecitve of who we send to negotiate for our side. The reason: the EU will never move far enough away from its own idealogies to make a deal possible, and if it did it wouldn't be able to get it ratified in every single parliament across 27 member states.
If I am right, then we'd be better off not wasting our time on this, but rather spend the next two years working towards creating trade links with the rest of the world.

Mistigris The thing about the EU is that, unlike our own politicians, they understand Northern Ireland and care bout the peace there. They also believe in liberal values. Fair to say the DUP start at a fundamentally major disadvantage with the EU in both respects........

Mmzz You are clearly not a follower of Mr Gove and his conduct on the Brexit select commitee. One exchange went something like this

Gove to the London Mayor: What are your views on the possibility that Brexit will allow us more flexibility with respect to X regulation on city trading.

Sadiq: I am not familiar with that regulation. I would need to ask my advisers in the City

Gove: Hmmph, I don't know anything about it either .....

Now quite apart from the fact that relaxing regulation on City trading will not strike most people as likely to end well, if you are going to try scoring points most people would do their homework properly....

I see we have another poster quite content to see the service industries which account for 70% of the economy deprived of one of their major sources of competitive advantage in global markets........

@whatwouldrondo - which poster is that?

but no, I haven't followed the Brexit committee at all. The only committee meeting I've watched in ages was when Domininc Cummings went in front of Andrew Tyrie and the rest of the Treasury Committee.

FWIW I think the GE was a disaster for brexit negotiations. I voted leave,b ut if I'd known that we'd have a hung parliament within weeks of giving notice to the EU, then I'd have voted remain.

Mmz Thea In ‘services’ its pretty similar, and while the UK relies more on ‘services’ than exporting say white electrical goods, the more services the UK sells to the rest of the world, once it stops relying so much on the now several year stagnant EU for our future prosperity, the less this ‘loss’ will matter.

The UK success in selling services to the rest of the world, which it already does with a considerable amount of success, and not just banking, add in accountancy, marketing, the creative industries, education and the knowledge economy, is to a very significant extent because it can provide those services across the EU markets, and can act as a gateway. The market for those services in Asia has already cooled. For instance remember the use of London for rembi trading that Cameron held as one of the prizes of Xi's visits. Not a peep has been heard from China on that one since Brexit. They are basically now focusing more on their relationship with Germany. Germany of course trades a lot more goods and services with China than we do, being part of the EU has certainly not held them back.

Shrink the services industry and you shrink the tax revenues, you do not make the rest of Britain better off if you make London poorer....

I agree, its crazy to even think of shrinking the service economy. We need to diversify from such a heavy reliance on financial services, but that's not the same thing as reducing the size of the service economy, or in any way preventing the financial services industry from flourishing.

The EU was very keen to get a cut of the City's revenues both via the European Union financial transaction tax and by trying to grow rival centres in Paris and Frankfurt. Since I started work, Frankfurt has grown exponentially from a dull as ditch water back water, to a considerable presence but it is still nothing compared to London. Paris went teh other way when French taxes sky rocketed with the result that migration, particiulary to work in the City, meant that London became the sixth largest French city.

I don't think the EU would have stopped trying had the UK stayed in the EU. So, at least leaving has one positive benefit in that theycan't raise eu wide taxes anymore that just so happen to disproportionately effect the UK.

I thought JC stated that within 6 months he would be PM.

When he gets to No. 10, he can sort the mess out 😀👍

On a serious note, we shall see what the outcome is after we leave, good or bad. It is all talk IMHO at present

My thinking is Europe will make an example of the UK to other members thinking of leaving.

Hmmm, the money we do put in, they will have to find that as well

If I am right, then we'd be better off not wasting our time on this, but rather spend the next two years working towards creating trade links with the rest of the world.

But the UK is not negotiating its future trade relationship with the EU: the current phase of negotiations concerns only the terms of exit, not the terms of the future relationship. Regardless of whether you want an agreement or not, there are matters that have you to be settled: the situation of EU citizens in the U.K. and Britons in the EU, the financial settlement, and Northern Ireland. These are the issues being discussed right now.

The UK has already wasted a year since the vote, and three months since A50 - it has published one position paper re EU citizens/ Britons in the EU (that is full of holes) and doesn't yet seem clear what its objectives are; in contrast the EU has a position agreed by all 27 member stages and has published a whole series of detailed documents ...

@Mistigirl - Yes, you are right, those issues are all to be discussed first before the EU will even begin to entertain any conversation about a trade deal.

No one is saying that they are not important too, but, the UK wanted to negotiate them simultaneously whereas the EU has insisted upon taking things in the order it prefers.

Its this sort of thing that makes me believe that we won't get a deal withon two years so we'd be better off focusing on where our future will be rather than whatever it is that the EU would like to talked about.

I say all this as a former expat. I really feel for the British people living in the EU now. I don't know why everyone else gets so worked up about the EU nationals who are here and has almost nothing to say about Brits living abroad (whose adopted countries aren't always so exercised about the lives of their immigrants as we are).

Saying all that though, we need to look to the future. Brexit can work, but it won't unless we start making plans to make it succeed, and I strongly suspect that in the end the EU will prove to be a dead end as far as those plans are concerned.

we won't get a deal withon two years so we'd be better off focusing on where our future will be rather than whatever it is that the EU would like to talked about

The UK will need some sort of transitional deal: walking out isn't an option. And it can't enter discussions with other trade partners while it is still an EU member i.e. before April 2019.

As far as Britons in the EU are concerned (and I am one), we have far more faith in the EU defending our interests than the UK. And we have been treated better by our host countries than EU citizens have by the UK - no 84 page documents, no huge fees or manufactured obstacles for PRR, no threats to use us as bargaining chips.

You are speaking for yourself and those in your situation. Mistigrl. I can tell you a different story of another country where I was an expat requiring a visa. Even simple stuff like having a visa officer who knew a smattering of English was not something worth spending money on for the immigrants. Ditto not bothering to be able to provide a list of required documentation for said visas, written in any language.

Britons in the EU don't need visas, so I'm not sure your point is. Like everywhere else, EU countries have immigration rules for non-nationals; but for EU citizens, including Britons, the procedures have always been straightforward (much more so than for EU citizens in the UK). And EU's position is that people like me should retain all our existing rights.

it was just an example of how some other countries treat immigrants, which is in sharp contrast to the way immigrants to the Uk are treated.

If the worst comes to the worst for the migrants to the UK, they will likely still be much better treated on a day to day basis, and in dealings with authority than the UK migrants in certain EU countries (not founder member ones).

as an example, here is the sort of info offered to people goign to the Royal liverpool hospital: www.rlbuht.nhs.uk/our-hospitals/your-visit/ (I just picked it at random). See how even the website is offered in several languages, including Arabic and Chinese?

Mmzz Planning for post Brexit? When they cannot even plan Brexit itself?

The Uk have got away with a lot when it has totally failed under governments of whatever hue to invest in the country's resources and infrastructure. Reengineering an economy requires vast planning and investment, look at China.

Take Science now struggling with the multiple body blows of funding uncertainty, departure of EU academics with their research (13%), the targeting of EU students for immigration control, the short termism that has crept into government funding policy, the marketisation of our universities etc. We punched well above our weight in Science in spite of the fact that Science research received only 1.9% of GDP compared with 3% in the rest of the G8 because of all the many benefits of EU membership, the funding, the partnerships, the regulatory frameworks, all the ways in which the playing field was levelled so that EU research was measurably more effective than that in the rest of the world. Suddenly the 5% of GDP that went to the EU comes into focus given the payback for important parts of the economy.

I have spent quite a bit of time on Science parks around Oxford and Cambridge recently and it has been shocking for someone who lived in China. An important and rapidly growing part of our economy, the scale is amazing, has evolved as a result of our strength in academic achievement, but entirely in spite of the government. Housing, roads, transport links are all creaking. The worker bees struggle to find anywhere affordable to live (with implications for whether people from less affluent backgrounds can even consider a career) . As the President of the Royal Society highlighted, if the government decided to invest in infrastructure concentrated on the strength of the scientific capability of academic institutions in the North, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, then disadvantaged communities like those in places like Barnsley and Hull could be linked by rapid transport links to help stimulate their economies. That is exactly what China would be doing.

The Libdems are the only party with a policy of matching the 3% of GDP invested in Science, none have any vision for the sector.

And what we need is a sector by sector plan. We are still living on Thatchers vision, and that relied on the EU.......

That's really depressing to read.

I accept most of it as read but just a couple of things on mitigation:-

1. The EU money that science received was actually UK taxpayer money recycled. We are net contributors to the EU - the second biggest behind Germany- so there hasn't been a penny of EU funding that wasn't actually UK money in the first place. Like a parent taking an adult child's wages and giving the child pocket money back.

1. The uncertainty is real, and damaging in and of itself, but you don't know that the funding won't be maintained post brexit.

1. I am very surprised to read that EU regulation helped create an environment where science research could thrive. Can you give an example?

1. The lib Dems might make promises but did they realistically think they would be given the chance to implement them and might that have given them a slightly freer hand to be populist? If, by some fluke, they had found themselves in a coalition, would this policy have stood up to reality any better than the 2010 tuition fees commitment?

1. A lack of vision and drive may well hamper Britain, but the structure of the political landscape would also make it difficult. (As an example I give you the contributing factors to Jeremy Corbyn's recent polling). I don't think anyone would argue that the EU leaders are any better so isn't it better to live under only one set of incompetent leaders rather than two? You give the example of China, and you are right. When the Chinese authorities decide to do something there political structure gives them the authority to do it, without having to win approval from the general populace first. It's a dictatorship in that way. Whereas we live our democracy but the price of it means that we make very little progress as a result because of governments are short-termist, then saying swing voters wrote the book on being fickle.

At least we have a tiny chance of creating an entrepreneurial environment through which the country might thrive. There's virtually no chance if we remained shakled to the EU. However, as I said up thread the is of that succeeding fell dramatically last month. I personally would not have voted for brexit had I know that we wouldn't have had a government with the ability to see it through in anything other than a passive way.

Apologies for the lack of paragraphs! They were there when I wrote it but the app deleted them.