The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

The Brexit thread.

By Brexiters, for Brexiters.

Remainers welcome, but gobshites & goadyfuckers are encouraged to take their business elsewhere.

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

I'm well aware that we said we didn't need a transition period but it's not the end of the world. What is important is that we get as many of our proposals as possible by the end of the transition period.
So exactly what red lines have vanished apart from during the transition period?
TM's quote is not attributed to any particular thing and could be quoted completely out of context.

We are in the middle of the negotiation. I am only interested in what the final outcome is going to be so why would I be furious?

So exactly what red lines have vanished apart from during the transistion period

None yet because we can't even get to the point of discussing what will happen after the transition period because of NI

TM's quote is not attributed to any particular thing

It absolutely is; it's specifically referring to customs arrangements- full quote below

Obviously, we are looking at different potential customs arrangements for the future, in order to deliver on the commitments we have made, and we are now at the point, as I said earlier in answer to a different question, of being able to look in more detail with the European Commission at some of those proposals. It is fair to say that, as we get into the detail and look at the arrangements, what becomes clear is that sometimes the timetables that have originally been set are not the timetables that are necessary when you start to look at the detail and when you really delve into what it is that you want to be able achieve. It is important that we have been able to get on to that point of looking in that greater practical, pragmatic detail at what it would take.

Reference quote above

Commons Select Liason Committee transcript

Question 71, page 25 from March 27th document

Londonmum.
Why do you keep calling me a man? is it supposed to be an insult?
And when did I say I work for Russia?

I’m struggling to work out what planet you’re on tbh.

Not sure about the man thing surfer but I think the other comment was referring to the post where you said 'my job here....' rather than you working for Russia.

‘My job here’ she took literally meaning she thinks I work for mumsnet?
Crikey.

Bear - I watched the select committee yesterday and didn't think the context was correct from my recollection.
Thank you so much for the link to the transcript as I was able to go through it and find the question asked and it was about the fact that HMRC had said that it would take 5 years to implement a new border solution( which would obviously not be a technological solution). So it was not a direct answer about the technical solution but about HMRC's assertion that it would take 5 years. Quite different if you read the question first.

Also let us be clear, the PM said we would have until the end of the implementation period to set up a new border. So this idea that everything needs to be done by March 19 is wrong.

Eh? The question referred to the fact HMRC said a border arrangement would likely take 5 years and TM didn't deny it, and actually confirmed things would take longer than they expected.

Question quoted below

Moving on to that, let us hope that we deliver a good result in terms of customs and borders and the Irish border. You have been very clear that you want to ensure that there is no return to a hard border. I think you will find much support in this Committee and in the House for that. Picking up on questions from Neil and Andrew, in evidence to us last September, HMRC said in relation to the new customs partnership: “our assessment is that this is more like a five-year implementation”. I wonder what discussions have been had internally about HMRC’s estimates of how long it could take to put in place new arrangements, once they are agreed at a political level.

How is that a good thing?

We haven't got 5 years?

We need a solution to be up and running by the end of 2020.

This all fits in with your narrative about just wanting a good deal at the end of the transition and not being worried about what's happening now.

What you fail to acknowledge is the groundwork is being laid now and it's not positive.

There's no magical solution that's just going to arrive in 1/1/21.

it was about the fact that HMRC had said that it would take 5 years to implement a new border solution( which would obviously not be a technological solution)

How does that fit with your assertion the SM/CU issue will be resolved by a technological border solution?

Bear - saying voters have a moral obligation to understand what they are voting for is very different to voters having to prove understanding of the issues before being ALLOWED to vote.
Anyway, how does someone prove they understand issues? Does every single voter have to appear before some sort of committee where they will be examined?

dapple why on earth are you continuing to labour a point from 2 years ago that only you bought up?

Obviously it could never be proven or tested - I never suggested otherwise.

It was the principle of understand the basics I was discussing.

Are you seriously trying to argue it’s perfectly fine to have no clue what the choices were, just to turn up and stick your cross in any box just because that’s your right?

For the avoidance of doubt ^ I never seriously^ suggested otherwise

Bear.
TM just said there will be more money for the NHS & schools once we leave the EU.
Do you think she’s lying?

surfer I'll believe it when I see facts that indicate it will happen.

So far there's absolutely no indication that that is going to happen.

She's pretty much back to the bus slogan which is disgraceful.

If it’s true. & we will have lots more money to spend on our own country & everything turns out ok. how embarrassed will remainers be on a scale of 1 to 10?
Because you’ve pushed yourselves into such a corner regarding Brexit ( everything’s going to be a disaster ) that you can’t really go anywhere other than planet humiliation.

I'll take my chances on that surfer

If it's an unmitigated successes I'll eat humble pie with the best of them.

Based on the evidence so far though, it's certainly not going to come to that.

I've said before, if it were possible, which obviously it's not, I'd like Remainers to be completely unaffected by Leaving and Leavers can share in any success between themselves, but equally, they, and only they, can pay for any failures.

I'm actually at the stage now where I want us to walk away and for the full impact to hit.

It's only then a Leavers might actually wake up the the realities.

you all seem to be clinging on to some miraculous outcome of which there's simply no evidence it's achievable.

And it's forever going to be everyone else's fault that we haven't got what we want.

Happy to eat humble pie. All good for My DD's future.
Hope that Leavers feel the same.

Bear, you really do look at everything in a very odd way!
What TM said was the following - 'sometimes it is clear that the timetables (the HMCR one of 5 years) that are originally set are not the timetables that are necessary when you start to look at the detail'. So she was talking about how the timetable would in fact be much shorter. I saw her say it so I know what was meant by it.

If it’s true. & we will have lots more money to spend on our own country

But how can the 1.2 % of GDP membership fee possibly turn into lots more money to spend?

I really don't believe it's me that's reading this in an odd way double. TM said

It is fair to say that, as we get into the detail and look at the arrangements, what becomes clear is that sometimes the timetables that have originally been set are not the timetables that are necessary when you start to look at the detail and when you really delve into what it is that you want to be able achieve.

To me, that is not saying that the HRMC timeline was over cautious, it was saying that now the government have looked at what they want to achieve, it ain't going to happen quickly.

I'd be interested in the opinions of others on this as we clearly see it differently.

To me, that is not saying that the HRMC timeline was over cautious, it was saying that now the government have looked at what they want to achieve, it ain't going to happen quickly.

That's how I see it, too, and I don't see it as you looking at "everything in a very odd way". Saying she means it will be a "much shorter" process is just a specious and wilful misreading of her words.

Glad it's not just me hasenstein

If she'd meant the HMRC timeline was overly cautious, she'd have just said that.

The pussy footing around indicates that's not the case.

The fact is, we don't even know what the solution even needs to look like yet.