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

We have negotiated extraordinarily badly, mainly because we were way too weak

You’re thinking about this in terms of strong arm “we were the British Empire don’t you know”.

Which is why we kept failing over and over again.

To me, the best negotiators don’t reveal their hands with all of their big balls tactics of “THESE ARE MY RED LINES”. Doing that effectively sets your stall out and people will just negotiate to that, end of, or push past them as you’ll be brittle.
Better to be flexible.

How can there be red lines when Brexit isn’t actually a Tory issue, despite how many try to make it one.

Not only Tories voted to leave.

What some people fail to realise regarding using no deal as a negotiation tactic is that it isn't one. If we leave with no deal and then want a trade deal with the EU, we then have to negotiate from an even worse position of really really really needing a deal to alleviate the mess we've got ourselves into.

Larrygrylls. I think everyone gets the point you are making that we can threaten the EU with economic damage if we don't get what we want.
The problem is that gun is being pointed at our heads and the EU don't want us to pull the trigger as much for our own sake as well as them getting splattered.
What success did Iran and N Korea ever have in negotiations by similarly holding its people as hostages? Sanctions, smaller economy, famine, loss of rights etc...is this the kind of negotiation outcome the brexiteers advocate?

Iggly,

It means people will either choose to pay more for EU goods or make substitutions.

The luxury car brands such as BMW and Mercedes-Benz will be badly hit as there are plenty of alternatives.

Have you stopped to think of the impact on these types of companies (and taxes paid by them) if UK demand craters?

My point is that everyone suffers in no deal, so both sides are incentivised to come up with a deal.

Not only Tories voted to leave.

That's true. But it came about because of infighting and pressure from the Tory back benches, which is the sole reason the referendum happened. Therefore it is a Tory issue because they had the referendum, and they have failed, time and time again to get their shit together.

So no, not every Leave voter is a Tory. Not every Tory is a Leave voter.

But without the Tories the referendum wouldn't have happened.

Jason,

What negotiating tactic would you suggest? Craven submission.

Believing that we have negotiating power is nothing to do with empire, a silly argument much employed on this board, nor about being a ‘little englander’, but about understanding the huge benefits the UK market brings to the EU.

What would happen after leaving with no deal? No one knows, which makes it quite scary, but it would be dependent upon other global players and the individual politics at play in, especially Germany. It would also depend on powerful corporate lobbies.

Pretending that the only way forward at that point would be, once again, cravenly begging for any deal, assumes a lot of knowledge that no one has.

It's beyond unfair.

Does anyone think that Nosy2006, or whatever guise they pop up next as, cares in the slightest about NI? Because I don't.
And no, I didn't need the cutting and pasting. A50 doesn't mention what happens when a country takes leave of its senses either.

I don’t deny that without the Tories we wouldn’t have had the referendum.

But that doesn’t take away from the fact that by approaching it as a Tory issue, we get nowhere.

I don’t want a no deal scenario. I think we need a decent deal and we have wasted the last three years on this by pandering to the extreme fringes of debate.

Theresa May started to do the right thing by trying to cross party lines but found it impossible to put aside her differences, as did Jeremy Corbyn.

Brexit should be framed as a national issue and tackled in a more pragmatic way.

I don’t want Brexit to happen. But it will. I certainly don’t want no deal to happen.

But pragmatism tells me we have to stick with the back stop and find a compromise.

"My point is that everyone suffers in no deal, so both sides are incentivised to come up with a deal."
We had one. It even accommodated our red lines.
Here's mine - NI only backstop/Border in the Sea.

How is that "craven submission " or whatever bullshit nonsense phrase you ex-pats choose?

That is how you negotiate.

I don't agree. It's perfectly possible for two sides to sit down and look for areas of agreement which they can build on. Instead of the bluff and bluster and willy waving of the Tory party, under the guise of being 'strong'.

Bellini,

Ex pats?

The backstop means that is leaving depends, ultimately, on the EU allowing us to leave. How was that ever going to fly with any leaver?

I did not know we could all have personal red lines, now. That will really complicate things...

Doesn’t the backstop tie us into EU regulations indefinitely? meaning we never actually leave ( hotel California ) That’s why the WA was kicked out 3 times.
I don’t know what the answer is though - going forward.

The backstop means that is leaving depends, ultimately, on the EU allowing us to leave. How was that ever going to fly with any leaver?

The backstop was agreed by all parties.

The NI only backstop ties NI in until a magical technological solution (apparently just round the corner or already exists), not the whole UK. Don't pretend you would sacrifice the whole of the UK for some fake love for the DUP.

Theresa May started to do the right thing by trying to cross party lines but found it impossible to put aside her differences, as did Jeremy Corbyn.

She might have been more successful if she had taken this stance from the beginning, rather than towards the end when she was desperate. By that time no one believed her. I suspect it wouldn't have made a great lot of difference to Corbyn though, whatever time she tried to approach him.

Iggly,

That is a total non sequitur. It did not make it through parliament, that is how our system works (although it is being sorely tested right now).

The backstop means that is leaving depends, ultimately, on the EU allowing us to leave. How was that ever going to fly with any leaver?

The backstop keeps us in the Customs Union - many Leavers thought that this would be the sort of deal on offer, so I imagine that it would fly very well with them.

A deal is not now going to happen, sadly. Boris and his cronies are such megalomaniacs they truly believe they are omnipotent and that we can simply return to some Churchillian era of ‘pulling together’ without actually defining what that means. He stands on a podium spewing out jingoistic, popularise bollocks to appease the masses. Unfortunately the masses seem to swallow his rubbish.

Where is all the money coming from for all these extra prison places?
The NHS money isn’t real; it’s simply moving the deckchairs and is a just a touch of the capital funding needed. It’s all going tomatoey constituencies too. Norfolk and Norwich home to Lord Prior gets a huge bonus at the cost of other more needy areas. Meanwhile our flagship London hospitals such as St Mary’s are crumbling dangerously.

Brexit will leave both individuals and the nation much, much poorer and much less visible on the world stage. We become closer allies with Trumps America - is that really something we want? It is sadly those who voted Brexit who will be the worst hit. Cameron, who tried to gain popularity by holding the referendum without consideration of the impact, is now happily buying his £3million plus holiday house in Polzearth.
There is no Empire (thank goodness), there is no huge manufacturing base, there is no queue of trained nurse, teachers, doctors, radiographers. The legal framework, the safety regulations and current trade agreements will disappear overnight and people will use that to their advantage and profit.
We need A50 revoked but nobody who is in a position to do that has the appetite as their shallow popularity would wane.
The sadness at the loss of peace in NI through the destruction of the GFA is too horrible to contemplate.

Nosy you're obsessed with the UK right to leave

Any of the 28 EU members are entitled to leave as per Article 50. No restriction was placed on UK when Article 50 was prepared in 2009 to reflect GFA even though GFA was developed 20 years earlier in 1998.

Article 50 was first drafted by Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, a Scotish Politician. That's right readers a Scotsman invented Article 50 and by his own admission he thought UK would never use Article 50. You could not make this up, hahahaha.

The logic was that if any member was going to leave it would be better to have a mechanism than avoid a no deal. However, the final draft of Article 50 is that if negotiations fail then the member who has chosen to do so leaves and all EU laws and treaties cease to be applicable to the leaving member.

This is why Brussels are in a panic. No deal is a crack in the system that was never considered when Article 50 was prepared by the EU and accepted by all EU members, ROI included.

EU could have developed a protocol for the GFA within Article 50 to reflect the unique nature of the Island of Ireland and the dependency of easy passage from NI to ROI. Either EU and ROI forgot about the GFA or they thought that nobody would want to leave?

So the border issue on the Island or Ireland in the event of a no deal is a large oversight by EU. Only EU have the right to change their laws on border control and GFA was not written into EU Law. Trimble, who was awarded the nobel prize, thinks that backstop goes against GFA which is based on consent as opposed to EU law.

Trimble is hardly unbiased.

The GFA is based on the consent of the people of Northern Ireland who did not consent to leaving the EU.

The backstop is there to protect the border between the EU and non EU while maintaining the GFA

GFA is not written into EU Law. Nor it is mentioned in Article 50 developed 20 years after GFA.

Why would the EU want to trick the UK into staying in?

So they can avoid their own law that states EU shall control borders with Non EU Countries.

We’ve negotiated with them for two years. They don’t want the UK to get any special treatment. The backstop is about the ROI, not the UK

UK voted to leave the EU, not ROI. Also ROI were not allowed to vote in the 2016 referendum in the same way neither, England, Scotland or Wales were allowed to vote in the 2014 Scottish referendum.

Article 50, the right to leave the EU, applies to all EU members. Nothing in Article 50 that states a member who has chosen to leave can only do so if all other members agree.

Don't tell me that 17.4 million who voted to leave the EU, some of which are from NI, are not allowed to leave the EU because ROI don't like it. The entire population of ROI is not even 30% of the numberof people who voted leave.

So, the UK should knuckle down and work on a sensible arrangement instead of ignorant dick swinging

NI only backstop was blocked by DUP

It’s embarrassing

If you are referring to the blunder EU have made over Article 50 by not having special provision for GFA I think you are correct.

The GFA is based on the consent of the people of Northern Ireland who did not consent to leaving the EU.

This.

So the border issue on the Island or Ireland in the event of a no deal is a large oversight by EU

Having a referendum without a plan in place to protect the GFA was a large (unforgivable) oversight by the UK.

Only the UK.

Who caused the war in Ireland in the first place!

The GFA is based on the consent of the people of Northern Ireland who did not consent to leaving the EU

46% of NI voted to leave the EU and they are on the same side that was in majority overall. Also NI is a member of UK. In EU eyes UK is a single EU member, not 4 separate members. However, any of the UK members can hold a referendum to leave the UK and then apply to join the EU.

Having a referendum without a plan in place to protect the GFA was a large (unforgivable) oversight by the UK

Disagree.

Article 50 development began in in early 2000's and was completed in December 2009. Prior to that Algeria had left the European Communities in 1962. Greenland left in 1985.

Even after 2009 St Barthelemy left in 2012. So countries leaving was not unheard of.

EU referendum was June 2016, six and half years after Article 50 developed. EU either forgot about the GFA or made the assumption that no other Country would leave.

Disagree

Fair enough.

Your logic is utter bullshit though. I don't believe you live in Ireland either.

I'm irritated I've wasted so much time on a bloody troll.