What do you not like about the withdrawal agreement?

[Phuquocdreams]

Is it really that bad? Just curious as to what people’s main problem with it is.

Why don't you go first, what do you like about it?

Well - with links to NI - I like the backstop obviously.
Also it provides for a smooth exit from EU with the least chaos.
The UK is not going to stay in the EU. Neither the Tory or Labour leaders want it to, and at this stage, with the exception of Ireland, I’m sure most of Europe just wants it gone.

{ I’m sure most of Europe just wants it gone.}
Not really. The EU would have liked the UK to stay in, and help at the 'top table' as it has/had significant world influence and could complement the other EU countries.
Now it desperately needs the UK to make it's mind up. The EU has splashed out billions in 'preparations' and is largely ready for the UK to leave, but there are other far bigger and more important issues that the EU has to work on.
You also have to remember that the WA is the START of 2 or most likely more years of negotiations for which the end point of the transition period can be either 'totally out' or even remain, if a UK government so wished.

Yes, it needs the UK to make its mind up, but the UKs mind is made up it would seem, so now the signing of the WA is just the best thing to do so we can move on to the negotiation of the trade deal. For those who want to stay in the customs union, the WA allows that (obviously), for those who don’t, then I’m sure they can come up with the “alternative arrangements” they talk about.

I don't like the fact that the WA, and any future deal that stems from it, is not as good as what we have now.

But there’s not going to be any deal that’s better than what you have now.
But neither of your 2 leaders want to revoke and it’s true that a 2nd referendum would be pretty divisive and it’s far from clear that remain would win anyway.

Our government need to grow up and put the future of the country first. They need to grow a backbone and revoke. Until then I won't support them as they try to implement things (WA) which will make the country poorer and subservient to the EU.

It’s a one way ticket out of the EU to nowhere. We will pay a lot of money to be in a much weaker and poorer position than we are now as members. It also hands over reins potentially to a nutjob like Johnson or Rees-Mogg to then take us to a no deal end.

It doesn't matter if we like it or not, the problem is that the people we elected to represent us don't like it and won't vote for it, that leaves us with a few other options and anyone with an interest is now firmly placing themselves into the revoke or no deal camps for obvious reasons. No one is going to get too invested in an agreement that will never be approved (except the PM)

The agreement suggests leaving is acceptable. There is no like about it.

What the hell is to like about it? I wouldn’t give up what I have to replace it with something that is worse on pretty much every level. Do you have any idea how many EU proposals the UK has either vetoed or secured significant exemptions from? It is utter insanity to agree to abide by rules you have zero influence over.

{Until then I won't support them as they try to implement things (WA) which will make the country poorer and subservient to the EU.}
You could argue that within the WA it is possible to leave the EU totally (as I believe that is the trajectory proposed within it at present) so 'subservience' would only be during the (hopefully) controlled departure, so a crack team of negotiators could see this done in say 2 years. (spot the problem?).
Crashing out although sounding 'instant' actually implies best part of a year to achieve during which it would be bedlam.
With the reasonable possibility of Mrs May being deposed very soon (this week?) it will take months before ANY real negotiations can happen with the EU for either WA or even 'crash out'.

But there’s not going to be any deal that’s better than what you have now.

Why should we have to accept a deal that is worse than what we currently have?

*The UK is not going to stay in the EU

In your opinion.

The fact that they are using Ireland as backstop, they don't realise how much they are risking the peace process. To be totally honest I don't like any of it, the only good thing will be if Theresa May gets kicked out.

Nat6999, the fact that who are using Ireland as a backstop? I don’t understand what you mean

The concept of 'crashing out' is far more serious than is being 'proposed' by people who should know better.
The 'terms' for crashing out, defined in A50 are such that ALL legal ties between the UK and the EU (and by extension a total of 69? countries that the UK trades with) stop overnight. It is (legally speaking) as if the UK DOES NOT EXIST. There is also no requirement for the EU to even negotiate after 29 March/ 11April. Of course they will but it can be entirely on EU terms.
Since the EU are our friends, they have put some measures in place so that separation would not be 'total' but it is on EU terms and time limited to 9 months to 12 months.
You could think of it like turfing your partner out and changing the locks, then only communicating by solicitor.

IceRebel - because that’s what brexit means! You’re hardly going to get a better deal from the EU than EU membership?

I don't like it because it means we are leaving the EU.

We have the best deal right now.

The 'backstop' is the EU's protection (of the GFA) against a physical border on the island of Ireland.
Technically if the UK leaves the SM and CU there should be a border to allow checking of goods. Leaving with no deal and the UK reverting to it's own WTO rules (which would be the basic terms, not used by anyone else) also requires a border for checking of goods.

{We have the best deal right now.}
This is very true. By definition in future (essential) trade with the EU the UK can never get any 'better deal' than EU members and so far no one has managed to show how trading with anywhere else in the world, for things the UK needs, will be any better.

because that’s what brexit means! You’re hardly going to get a better deal from the EU than EU membership?

I'm sure there are many who voted leave thinking the exact opposite. I wonder if their votes would have been different, if the above had been written on the voting card.

I don't like it because it doesn't provide a smooth exit from the EU. It's a transitional agreement, the exit would need to be negotiated by the time the terms of the WA were up. Or they'd need to extend it, I think, presumably this is possible. However, given the absolutely travesty that the Government has made of the business so far, I have zero faith that they'd be able to negotiate the UK's actual exit in a timely manner, that they'd actually do a good job, & that they wouldn't further sour international relations.

Also, I don't like it because it's only necessary because of a flawed referendum. If it hadn't been advisory, & if the evidence of cheating had been proved in time, they would have had to void the result. I don't just want a second referendum. I want a referendum with no cheating.

Why should we have to accept a deal that is worse than what we currently have? Because the electorate voted for it? The whole point of being a member of the EU is that you get the best deal.

Apart from it meaning that we leave (I voted Remain), I have no problem with WA. It is the least worst version of Leave currently on offer.

{I'm sure there are many who voted leave thinking the exact opposite. I wonder if their votes would have been different, if the above had been written on the voting card.}

On the basis that as a club member your T shirt cost £5, why would anyone expect a non member to pay less for it?
Similarly, food delivered by very well organised truck routes from Europe allowing daily deliveries is not going to be so cheap when brought by ship from the USA/wherever.
Distinct 'logic' fail going on.