The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

This may be the last Brexit Arms thread that I will host.

It was intended to be a non-partisan and relatively light hearted thread for posters on both sides of the divide, but unfortunately this seems to have proved impossible so far.

It is not supposed to be a place for the disgruntled Remainer to use as an outlet to abuse and kick out at their perceived enemy.

I will give it one last go in the hope that things will change.

So.... onwards to Brexit....

🍻 🥂 🍾 🍺 🍷

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Bear,
I have only see Laura Kuenssberg on BBC website from yesterday and bits on early morning talk radio.
But both talk about Theresa May getting it, and been honest we UK voters and outlining hard truths.
These include realising we can't have our cake and eat it. So keeping membership and associate membership of EU bodies, a new arbitration cover, I think with UK/EHC working together.
Plus the Irish border will be hard but we must find common ground.
She also admits we, Britain won't get everything Brexitters want.
I also notice Keir Starmmer said Labour also wouldn't accept NI been in common regulations body either.
I would have thought you would be partially happy, she seems to agree with much you keep saying.
Or am I wrong.
I said I would be fairly happy with a "EFTA" type brexit deal, access similar to old EEC, but with freedom to do our own FTA with the rest of world.
Could you live that compromise.
I know I annoy you, but that is both genuine appraisal of what I had seen/heard of her speech and Question to you and other remainers
You can ignore if you want.
I personally hope the speech opens the way to serious talks on what's possible both in the UK and government and commission.

it may have escaped your notice, but we are in the process of leaving

No surfer we are in the process of TM telling you we are leaving whilst doing nothing to actually resolve the issues associated with leaving.

End result will be you being told we've left while nothing much has actually changed because we can't work out a way to do anything more radical.

If parliament brought a second Ref, I would be outraged as it undermines democracy imo

It doesn’t undermine democracy if a second referendum is explicitly about the deal on offer, as in people voting on a defined set of parameters rather than a nebulous concept that means different things to different people.

If parliament voted against Brexit, I would again be outraged

And that comes back to the point that the UK is a representative democracy, and MPs have a duty to vote for what they believe is best for the country, not just to vote on whatever their constituents demand. That’s why Major is talking about a free vote in Parliament.

user I think you and I must be reading different reports because nowhere have I seen TM 'being honest with voters or outlining hard truths.'

If she did the first things she'd have to concede is that leaving SM/CU is not compatible with no hard border in NI.

Sorry Faith
My crap English skills strike again, I meant that if UK government/parliament ends up with EFTA type exit, not full clean break, although not a full brexit, I will live with the fact we have exited the EU.
It's a compromise, but life sadly often is.
I couldn't agree to another referendum or direct vote to stay in
That would be back to square one, UKIP and I would definitely vote leave in a 2nd referendum.
Sorry if not been clear enough.

Sides are hurting from laughing at the ' come together' bit of TM's speech , far too much time spent reading Viz as a youngster ! Cant seem to stop thinking in double entendre's

Will see if an episode of HUTH will cure it

Bear.
Those words are in Laura Kuenssburgs's blog yesterday, back by the cabinet. Also on BBC Radio 5 up all night programme is morning, most of the 0400-0500 slot taken up by it.
Lots of no longer Cake and eat statements.
Sorry at work so can't see FB/SM.

user147
You asked about Free Trade Agreements
I find dealing with your questions much more interesting than Faith's insults and refusal to explain

The Brexiteers, particularly Liam Fox and David Davis talk about Free Trade Agreements like they are some sort of magic dust that can be created instantly and make everything just tickety boo.
They are nothing of the sort.

Free Trade agreements
can be narrow - eg Greenland's fisheries - but that still took three years of haggling

can be broad - eg NAFTA - which Trump has just blown up by slapping tariffs on Canada which will be rolled back by the WTO in due course

can be total - eg the EU - where all countries commit to their manufacturing and services complying to agreed rules that are centrally set and thus every country knows that food and toys from all of the others are safe

BUT
The UK used to have Free Trade Agreements with most of the world - it was called the Empire and Colonialism.

An economically small country will never get a good FTA with a much stronger country - because the big country can force its view through or just walk away.
In the dealings with the EU, the UK has just made itself the much smaller country and will have to suck it up.

As for the Free Trade agreements with all of the other countries in the world ....
What do they want from the deal ?
And will that ever be acceptable to the UK ?
eg The USA will want to be able to swamp the UK with its coal and gas and agricultural products
eg China will want to swamp the UK with its steel and minerals and fish our waters
eg India will want to send tens of thousands of its students to work and live in the UK
None of which are in the UK's interests.

Trade agreements of all sorts are governed by the WTO (a group of 800 unelected, well paid bureaucrats in Geneva)
Free Trade Agreements are still arbitrated by the WTO

and they take YEARS AND YEARS to organise
so for the missing decade the UK would be stuck in WTO rules - which would destroy the economy.

To protect British jobs and make sure that there is money invested in places like Hull, staying in the Customs Union is basically essential.

Frumpety - we used to have a 'Things you wish you'd never said' book at work, and I featured in it a disproportionately large amount compared to everyone else.

I apparently cannot help but speak in double entendres (it was a very, very male dominated workplace though, so viz style humour was de rigueur).

Also find it interesting that Faith clearly says at 10:21 replying to me;
I quote
If parliament voted to remain in CU/SM, rather than a clean break, I would be pissed off I believe that would be an opportunity lost. But I would grudgingly accept it as it first step towards a proper separation
I said I could live with EFTA type compromise.
But not one remainer has suggested an acceptable compromise to their side.
I thought we had the closed, one track minds, hard brexit only. But all remainers on here seem hell bent on membership only, I bet some form of EFTA, would satisfy 70% of UK.
Also we would have left EU, and it would be first step on way to the future. Agnes said they already have their own tribunal too.

At Faith's 11:20 post.

Remember one evening working in a pub Faith , it was a snowy night , all night myself and a regular were chuckling and batting double entendres back and forth , when a person who always arrived for last orders wandered in and stated ' Ive had to come up your back passage as the front is too slippery ' , he had to pull his own pint

Sorry, worried now, that my last post was inappropriate. sorry if it was Faith

PS User
Read the text of Theresa's speech in terms of checkable facts
rather than wafty airy fairy platitudes.

You know from this thread that we remain pedants are rather fond of evidence and links and facts and examples
and that our annoyance with the speeches made by ministers is the complete lack of any of the above in what they say.

Put your nasty, cynical TiP hat on when you listen and see whether there is anything concrete in her words.

Frumpety, just laugh out loud and sent tea everywhere, nearly choked laughing, people stirring, oh well

User
re EFTA : it would be a major step in the right direction
but it would still be pay in and have no say
whereas if you are going to pay in, you might as well have a say ....

Talkin,
I did link to where I found it, so that's a start.
Looking forward to hearing it.
Sad like that

user, EFTA is a worse deal than we have now, paying for access and no say on the rules, so why would that be acceptable to you?

I did link to where I found it, so that's a start.
Absolutely - we'll turn you into an analyser of information yet

and if you get the hang of analysing THROUGH what politicians say, you'll be able to help your community more in the long term - a good thing

at 'he had to pull his own pint'

Sorry. It's contagious.

Its ok Michael had a little snurk at your name too

user, EFTA is a worse deal than we have now, paying for access and no say on the rules, so why would that be acceptable to you?

In fairness to user, there is no way out of this mess that does not involve compromise, because of the inherent contradictions in the government's position. There is no such thing as a Brexit which respects the red lines and avoids economic damage and a hard border. So when Brexit supporters signal a desire to compromise then jumping on them isn't constructive.

The problem is that just EFTA, without the EEA, does not go very far to solving the most insoluble problems with Brexit. If I'm not mistaken we are back to a Swiss brexit, which is no more doable now than it was when the Leave campaign first floated this solution, then abandoned it, during the referendum campaign.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43250035

Mrs May is expected to set out five tests to guide the UK in negotiations:

That any deal must respect the referendum result

That any deal must not break down

That any deal must protect jobs and security

That any deal must be "consistent with the kind of country we want to be" - modern, outward-looking and tolerant

That any agreement must bring the country together

Bear,
I know EFTA is poor man's EU to you. But thought it might be the way government could gain access to SM for SMMT, and still leave EU, like promised.
Also has it's own tribunal, so possible why to deal with disagreements. Just a possible way forward, you all keep asking us leavers to suggest ways, I have spent 3 days looking into EFTA and asking (daft) questions on here about it, thought it was a way forward. Though I am not called Boris, Liam or David so have no chance of implementing anything.
sorry

Deep breaths and straight face now . Those five tests are completely unachievable aren't they ? Perfect if you don't want to do something , set up a list of tests you know cannot be achieved ?