To ask Remainers ...

[ScreamingLadySutch]

Your views?

Brexiteers were asked their reasons the other day. So I would like to ask Remainers

• what do you think will happen, and what are you so afraid of?

1tisILeClerc
Those reports are 'old data', December 2018 one of them and 2016 for the other.

The George Osborne link is from 2016 of course - the same month and year as your George Osborne link.

we have to sign the WA to negotiate a deal with the EU

Not signing the WA cuts out the 21 month transition period - we won't have to adopt new EU rules and regulations we don't like, particularly on matters that do not affect trade in goods with the EU.

Trade with the EU won't stop with 'no deal'- it will just be on different terms until/if we agree a free trade deal. It may be that we end up signing a series of mini deals with the EU - bilateral trade agreements similar to the ones we have with other countries around the world.

I think Barnier said there had to be a 'solution' to the Irish border, that's not the same as signing the WA.

That means that if by some miracle we find some competent negotiators and manage a better deal with one of these countries than the EU have, they have to offer the same terms to the EU.

I don't think you are right with this statement (I'm prepared to be told otherwise) - the WTO website suggests we can make our own trade deals (with non-EU countries);

"The ever-growing number of regional trade agreements and preferential trade arrangements is a prominent feature of international trade.WTO members participating in these agreements are encouraged to notify the WTO when new agreements are formed."

www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/rta_pta_e.htm

Revoke = problem solved

Until the next General Election when the Brexit Party take a third of the seats in Parliament.

that's not the same as signing the WA

There is very little I agree with clavinova but this is an exception.

I do wish 1tisleclerc would stop insisting we have to sign the WA in the event of no deal.

It’s simply not true and discredits the things that are true.

That’s never going to happen. Look how many votes UKIP got and never managed a single MP. If article 50 was revoked, there’d have to be another referendum to start the Brexit process again.

“Until the next General Election when the Brexit Party take a third of the seats in Parliament.”

at the idea that Brexit party MPs would actually deliver Brexit. They don’t want to take responsibility or do any actual work, just moan and feel aggrieved.

DippyAvocado

The UK is geographically tiny with a relatively small population.It has few natural resources.Our former position of power and influence came from our naval resources, which in the digital world are no longer very valuable.

The UK is doing very well in the digital world;

"According to KPMG, in the first six months of 2018 UK firms brought in £12.3billion worth of investment, leading the way in Europe and outshooting the US for the first time."

www.business-reporter.co.uk/2019/03/15/a-stellar-year-for-the-uk-fintech-sector/#gsc.tab=0

Fintech is recognised as one of the UK’s fastest growing business sectors, worth a total of £7bn and employing over 60,000 people.

www.businessleader.co.uk/how-does-the-uk-fintech-sector-compare-with-the-rest-of-europe/52971/

{I do wish 1tisleclerc would stop insisting we have to sign the WA in the event of no deal.}

It is the natural progression from the EU statements:
The WA will not be reopened.
There will be no negotiations until after the WA is signed.
Just because 'leavers' have difficulty adding things together does not make it untrue.

To pretend that when the UK needs to start negotiations with the EU, which it will have to, without having signed the WA is the part that is untrue.
I am working on what the EU are saying, not some fantasists in the UK.

1tis we have done this to death.

In the event of a deal the WA must be signed

In the event of no deal the contents of the WA become part of negiotions to get a third country deal.

They are NOT the same thing - the WA does not have to be sign n the event of no deal.

Not signing the WA results in no deal.

Sorry - that should say that in order to progress to a Brexit deal the WA must be signed.

Bearbehind
Well, I understand English and can make a logical conclusion from two sentences.
While Mr Barnier has not stated in one concise sentence (for the hard of thinking) this is the logical conclusion.
When the UK finally understands this, things may progress.
Being so fuckwitted as to thing this means 'the UK can do what it likes' is beyond ridiculous.
As I have already explained (as have many others) strictly no the UK does not have to sign the WA in the event of a no deal. HOWEVER the EU will not enter any further negotiations until the UK does sign.

1tis you are literally the only person who has reached that conclusion.

No one else, not even Barnier has said the WA needs to be signed in the event of no deal, only that the main issues it covers need to be agreed.

I’m not so ‘fuckwitted’ that I think that that means the UK can do what it likes but if you really can’t see how inflamatory it is to state as fact that the WA needs to be signed in the event of no deal, when it is not even true, then you might want to consider who is being a fuckwit.

{1tis you are literally the only person who has reached that conclusion.}
Apart from everyone else with brains.

The contents of the WA are the hundreds of treaties that need to be either ratified if individual items are to be retained, or torn up if the UK does not wish to retain them. The contents of THE WA will not be changed because they are describing a legal process to get from the UK being in to the UK being out of the EU. The EU runs on rules and procedures, the UK signed up to them in the past, probably wrote many of them.
I understand perfectly that you are being argumentative for the sake of it and combining this with the inability to understand what is likely to happen.
Do I give a shit about you? No, not at all. Do I care for all those who are going to have their lives either wrecked or unnecessarily impacted by Brexit (that is almost everyone in Europe), yes I care very much.

1tis quite frankly your attitude and tone stinks.

You ‘talk’ to everyone like shit - whatever side they are on.

You are incorrect about this so revert to insults.

It doesn’t convince anyone.

Ah diddums.
With the rate of 'progress' the UK will probably crash out anyway so your wet dream can become a reality. I just feel sorry for everyone else that is having their life wrecked just to please you.

Back to my point about your attitude, I’m a fucking Remainer but you are so blinkered in your views you haven’t even worked that out.

I think we should put ropes up around you two it makes no difference in actuality if it's the withdrawal agreement or a withdrawal agreement- the wording will be the same and the terms won't change, and it will need to be signed whatever it's called.

Well I'm just an 'ordinary' remainer doing stuff to help Europeans. It seems that Bearbehind is just being argumentative for the sake of it.

...to answer the question:

I voted Remain because I quite like(d) being part of the EU. I could see the projects that they helped to fund - large infrastructre projects, community building, social cohesion prjects. I like being in a Northern Ireland where I can cross into the south without the long waits at the border that I remember from my youth. I like(d) being able to work and travel across a wide number of countries with great ease. I like(d) feeling part of something greater, something strong which woudl look after all its members.

What am I afraid of? Another Scottish Indy ref, and a border poll, which will fragment the UK. (Actually I'm not afraid of that at all, I'd quite happily live in a re-united Ireland, but I don't think any of that was what an intended outcome).

Recession, job losses, scarcity or reduced variety of food, fuel and medicines, an NHS unable to cope and forced to become more commercial/ privatised. An isolated and still deeply divided society. An inward looking "Britain First" type of mentality.

And the really big thing - climate change. Which set-up serves us best for preparing for and avoiding envirnomental catastrophe?

It’s content will have to be agreed jason but the toxic WA itself, and let’s face it, it’s what it stands for more than what is in it, is the problem.

If there’s 1 thing I’ve learned in these last 3 years is the Brexit is all about feelings for those who support it.

It would be far better if people made it clear that it’s the content that need to be agreed whatever happens then in might just start to sink in.

Antagonising them further by saying the WA will need to be signed whatever happens just makes them dig their heels in an refuse to listen to anything else.

Hence the posters even on here who spout the nonsense about not having a border because no one wants it.

{Which set-up serves us best for preparing for and avoiding environmental catastrophe?}

Being part of the EU is going to be far more important to do this. The activities (industry) are pretty minor compared to the EU and of course a lot smaller than the USA and China. The UK on it's own being 'super green' and efficient will make next to no difference on a global scale, which is what is needed. While the UK is celebrating 2 weeks of not using coal powered electricity generation, China is building and commissioning a new coal power station every few months. It is also illegally releasing CFC gasses which are rolling back the efforts that the West has made in stopping their use. China should have stopped but it appears some are still disobeying Chinese instructions.
Pressure from the EU for China and USA to reduce harm as 'good practice' and carrot rather than stick is of course the best approach.

7 of the world’s top 10 economies by 2030 will likely be made up of current emerging markets

Not the UK, then. So much we could do to protect our position. But instead want to make the competition as hard as possible. Apparently this is "The Will of the People."

{Antagonising them further by saying the WA will need to be signed whatever happens just makes them dig their heels in an refuse to listen to anything else.}
But fannying around and suggesting that it could be changed is the biggest part of the problem.
If you are playing football, the rules are a goal at each end, a ball and preferably an equal number of players. That is the WA position. Deciding you want pink or blue shirts or any other accessories comes after the basic rules.
The WA is not a deal, it is the rules to enable a deal.
By referring to it as a deal, Theresa's deal is not correct, as is any suggestion that these rules will be altered. Yes the PD will undoubtedly be changed ultimately.
Some view the WA as a trap. It is not, it is the basic rules. and as the treaties are all defined, if the UK is leaving then it describes the final position after transition.

FFS - if we do not sign the WA, the consequence is no deal.

It therefore cannot follow that we have to sign the very thing that caused no deal in the first place.

Theoretically we could say fuck it at the point and do our own thing.

We won’t, we’ll negiotate a deal and that deal will include the aspects of the WA but, crucially, it is open for renegotiation and it’s no longer called the WA, ie the thing that was voted down 3 times.

Even if nothing actually changes.

I think it’s a moot point anyway as I’ve never believed we’ll actually end up with no deal anyway but, the more people like you peddle inflammatory shite like ‘we will have to sign the WA whatever happens’ the more people jump on the ‘lets jump off the cliff t9 prove them wrong’ bandwagon.

In answer to your questions OP

what do you think will happen I personally don't think Brexit will happen. I think there is going to be a hell of a lot of teetering on the edge of the abyss between now and October, but nah, not happening.

what are you so afraid of Wasps and being outside in a storm, other than those fairly irrational fears not a right lot phases me. If and it is a huge and frankly unlikely if. some form of Brexit transpires, then I would worry for those who are most at risk of the impact of further austerity, the left behinds will be abandoned on a layby of a minor B road economically, without a flask of tea or tartan blanket between them.

And with no breakdown cover or a mobile signal ! Been there, its shit !

{FFS - if we do not sign the WA, the consequence is no deal.}
Jesus you are hard work!

OK, the UK crashes out with no deal and does not sign the WA. Brilliant.
At this point the UK cannot 'demand' any supplies from the EU and all existing treaties are ripped up.

After a few weeks with reduced transportation, and a whole host of other 'inconveniences' the UK will want to negotiate food etc for the longer term. Remember that in a 'no deal' scenario there are NO legally binding treaties between the UK and EU, they got ripped up.
In their generosity, the EU have said (a 12 point plan published in Feb?) that they will allow planes, ships, trucks running under EU ONLY insurance, certifications etc, essentially food and medical aid to the UK. They have said that this is for up to 9 or 12 months only and is done mainly to help the EU producers, which just happens to be handy for the UK too. They can withdraw any or all of these concessions at any time at their discretion.

Presuming that the UK wants to continue to receive food etc from the UK it will need new permanent trade negotiations. The EU will not commence any negotiations until that already existing sparkly WA has the UK Prime Ministers paw print on it.