Please can someone tell me the upsides of Brexit

[CleopatrasMum]

Apparently Dominic Raab has said there are many upsides of Brexit. The article in the Guardian that I read this in gave no details of what Raab (presumably) went on to say those upsides were.

Please can someone explain them to me?

Link to article here for what it's worth:

Raab says Brexit will bring 'huge series of upsides' for UK trade

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/06/raab-says-brexit-will-bring-huge-series-of-upsides-for-uk-trade?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

He too was not elected if I remember?

Gordon Brown was elected. Boris Johnson was elected. They were both elected as MPs. The UK system never directly elects a prime minister so I really don't get this obsession with claiming PMs weren't elected. Although given Johnson criticised a previous MP becoming PM despite for not being party leader during the election, I can understand giving him a bit of a hard time over it.

The UK are creating conditions that force a border

Brexit negotiations are between two parties, EU and UK. If negotiations do not produce an agreement then both parties have failed. If EU bothered about GFA why was it not included in Article 50 which was developed 20 years after GFA?

Your logic is like saying an unwanted pregnancy can only be one person's fault. Totally overlooks fact that end result was the action of two parties.

Who puts up the border us irrelevant. The UK have a responsibility under the GFA to ensure the border is kept open

In the event of a no deal all legal agreements between EU and UK cease to exist. So what EU does afterwards is beyond UK control. EU regulations require border control between EU and Non EU countries. Does the GFA force the EU to ignore their rules? Can the UK, after it had left the EU, force the EU to ignore their rules?

Your logic is like saying that someone who resigned from their job is responsible for what their former employer does afterwards.

@NosyBe2006 Your logic is like saying an unwanted pregnancy can only be one person's fault. Totally overlooks fact that end result was the action of two parties.
No, your analogy is shit. It's like one person deciding to get pregnant and then telling the other that they have to deal with it. Not sure what your agenda is but it's completely devoid of logic.

Your logic is like saying an unwanted pregnancy can only be one person's fault. Totally overlooks fact that end result was the action of two parties.

Did I miss the part where the EU called a referendum?

Because the Brexit vote, and the Leave majority of a non legally binding referendum being blindly clung to by the government of the UK has absolutely hee haw buckshee to do with the EU.

So tell me again, how is it the EU's fault?

How can they be held responsible for the actions of the UK government and electorate?

Because that's what you're saying. It's utter bullshit.

If EU bothered about GFA why was it not included in Article 50 which was developed 20 years after GFA?

Because Article 50 is deliberately obscure and mindful of the various issues of all 28 EU countries.

In the event of a no deal all legal agreements between EU and UK cease to exist.

That's not how a no deal exit works. Eventually the UK will have to compromise. How can it possibly strike up trading deals with other countries when those countries know how irresponsible the UK has been regarding the negotiations.

inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-no-deal-benefits-positive-consequences-uk-leaving-eu-explained/

If EU bothered about GFA why was it not included in Article 50 which was developed 20 years after GFA?

Seriously?

Your logic is like saying an unwanted pregnancy can only be one person's fault.

Except in this instance the UK is insisting the EU terminate the pregnancy while at the same time keep the baby.

Does the GFA force the EU to ignore their rules?

The EU is not a signatory to the GFA.

Your logic is like saying that someone who resigned from their job is responsible for what their former employer does afterwards.

I have never claimed the UK have any control over or responsibility for the actions of the EU afterwards. It is more similar to the UK having signed a non-disclosure agreement with their previous employer or an agreement not to work for a competitor for a period of time. If the UK breaks that agreement, they are creating the circumstances that requires the previous employer to take mitigating measures. It will also probably result in legal action.

How can they be held responsible for the actions of the UK government and electorate?

Because that's what you're saying

Incorrect. EU did not take part in the 2016 referendum in the same way England, NI and Wales did not take part in the 2014 referendum. Once vote is cast then government takes over. In this case EU and UK.

Your logic is like saying it is the judges fault that crimes are committed

Brown did at least have a majority without having to do shabby deals with other parties.

A timely reminder of why Brexit has happened yet.

twitter.com/gavinesler/status/1158635841918513153

Your logic is

non existent Nosy

Incorrect. EU did not take part in the 2016 referendum in the same way England, NI and Wales did not take part in the 2014 referendum. Once vote is cast then government takes over. In this case EU and UK.

Are you drunk?

The EU had no part in the referendum because it never wanted it, didn't need it and wanted to keep things as they were!

Its the UK that chucked it's toys out of the pram and you're looking to blame the EU????

That's like me punching you in the face and you blaming my friend who was standing behind me!

Because Article 50 is deliberately obscure and mindful of the various issues of all 28 EU countries

Disagree. Article 50 not detailed as those who developed it thought nobody would leave. Of the 28 members are there any others that have a GFA type agreement? No there is not. Hence Article 50 could have easily included a protocol for the island of Ireland.

How can it possibly strike up trading deals with other countries when those countries know how irresponsible the UK has been regarding the negotiations

164 countries are WTO members, EU included. On an individual basis USA is UK largest trading partner.

@NosyBe2006 - Your logic is like saying it is the judges fault that crimes are committed

Your analogies are becoming more and more ludicrous. Throwing in a ridiculous analogy doesn't add weight to your point. It just makes your point look less informed.

The pound is now equal to the euro. Thanks to Brexiteers!

www.indy100.com/article/pound-fall-euro-exchange-rate-value-leave-eu-brexit-no-deal-9051061

twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1159870334717321216

Hence Article 50 could have easily included a protocol for the island of Ireland.

But why would it have needed to? Should Article 50 have also included the historic union that is the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland?

Article 50 was drawn up with the support of all the 28 countries and incorporated into the Lisbon Treaty.

It is more similar to the UK having signed a non-disclosure agreement with their previous employer or an agreement not to work for a competitor for a period of time. If the UK breaks that agreement, they are creating the circumstances that requires the previous employer to take mitigating measures. It will also probably result in legal action

Poor analogy. UK already trades with non EU countries which are all competitors. EU putting up a border between NI and ROI is the EU following its own rules to protect EU countries from dangerous goods entering from non EU countries.

The EU had no part in the referendum because it never wanted it, didn't need it and wanted to keep things as they were

So why was Article 50 developed in the first place that all 28 EU members supported?

What does that have to do with brexit?

The poster referred to an article by Brown in relation to the UK breaking up due to current status of Brexit. Brown I remember was against the Scottish referendum of 2014.

It just makes your point look less informed

So tell me why it is solely the fault of UK that negotiations with EU so far have not produced a deal.

Article 50 was developed with support of all 28 EU members. Therefore any one can terminate. So don't follow your logic about pregnancy termination. Not sure about keeping the baby either as EU would not enter negotiations until after Artie 50 was invoked.

The EU didn't have to enter into negotiations at all. Article 50 doesn't require a withdrawal agreement, the UK and EU wanted one. But it has to allow fir the continuation of the EU rules for 5he remaining members. The UK wanting all the benefits of membership while being outside is what fucked the negotiations, nothing to do with the EU. And you still don't get it, do you?

Gordon Brown has written an excellent piece in The Observer re the consequences of a no deal Brexit.

Is that the same Gordon Brown who told us in Scotland the only way to stay in the EU was to remain part of the UK?

Yes. And the vast majority of Scottish people voted to remain in the EU.

Gordon Brown did not have control over the nefarious Brexit campaign but he was an excellent campaigner on behalf of Remain.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44856992

It's a testament to the Northern Irish and the Scottish that they all could see through the bullshit that the Brexit campaign was espousing.

Article 50 doesn't require a withdrawal agreement
It kind of does?
Article 50 specifies the process for leaving the EU. After notifying the EU the process is that "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

The UK executive (TM) negotiated and concluded an agreement and a future relationship - the ERG prevented this being approved by Parliament.
The backstop has been blown up out of all proportion to its impact to promote 'no deal' against the expressed wish of over 90% of the 2017 voters (64% of the electorate)

This was the wording of the referendum:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/eu-referendum/about

There was nothing in the referendum to suggest how the United Kingdom should leave the EU.

There was a slim majority to leave. How that leave should happen is not a matter of the Government. It is now enshrined in law that it is a Parliamentarian process. Personally, I think it should go back to a peoples vote.