Brexit watch

Started by Nick, October 20, 2016, 18:02:39 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Slim

LOL well at the very least I would have substituted that "when" in the third-last sentence for an "if". Otherwise there's a real danger that poor old Nick Cohen will turn out to be a 'superliar' himself.

Ian Harris

February 25, 2017, 23:52:33 pm #676 Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 00:07:35 am by Ian Harris
This is quite an interesting discussion. Pre-23 June, many supporters of Leave went to great lengths to insist their prime concern was not immigration - how very dare you - but sovereignty, fears of an EU superstate, the corrupt EU, indignation about Greece.

Now I read that it was crystal clear that a vote for leave was a vote to change immigration policy, and to retain freedom of movement would be a betrayal of everyone who voted leave. Of course no-one believed in the £350m - move on, Remoaners! That was just Boris being Boris.

The vote to leave the EU was a vote to leave the EU. Nothing else. If you want more, or you want to specify the terms, lobby your MP, and if you don't like their decision, vote them out in a general election. Take note, Mr Corbyn.
London, May 1987
Birmingham, May 1987
London, Apr 1992
Paris, May 1992
Sacramento, Feb 1994
San Francisco, Feb 1994
Raleigh, Jul 2002
London, Sep 2004
London, Sep 2004
Manchester, Sep 2004
London, Oct 2008
Birmingham, Oct 2008
Birmingham, May 2011
London, May 2011
Birmingham, 2013
London, 2013

Slim

Quote from: Ian Harris on February 25, 2017, 23:52:33 pm
This is quite an interesting discussion. Pre-23 June, many supporters of Leave went to great lengths to insist their prime concern was not immigration - how very dare you - but sovereignty, fears of an EU superstate, the corrupt EU, indignation about Greece.

Now I read that it was crystal clear that a vote for leave was a vote to change immigration policy, and to retain freedom of movement would be a betrayal of everyone who voted leave. Of course no-one believed in the £350m - move on, Remoaners! That was just Boris being Boris.


What Boris said was that £350m a week could be freed up for "our priorities such as the NHS", which remains entirely correct. What he didn't say that he would personally guarantee how the government would spend it. He wasn't the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time.

And a vote to leave was all of these things - to reduce immigration, to repatriate our laws, to leave the single market, depending on the individual voter. Many supporters of Leave went to great lengths to insist that immigration was a pressing concern.

QuoteThe vote to leave the EU was a vote to leave the EU. Nothing else. If you want more, or you want to specify the terms, lobby your MP, and if you don't like their decision, vote them out in a general election. Take note, Mr Corbyn.


In reality it was more than that. For example, both sides made clear that it would mean leaving the single market so no-one can pretend that the Leave voters weren't voting for this. The government has not merely a mandate but a duty to ensure that this referendum pledge is carried out.

döm

There was certainly no mention of the Single Market or the Customs Union on the ballot paper.


The Tories are going headlong into their own ideological version of Brexit with little regard for the likely damaging economic consequences.


Talking about all these amazing trading deals around the World while shutting the door in the enormous market at the back door.


Truly bizarre!

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave!

DavidL

Quote from: döm on February 26, 2017, 01:14:21 am

Talking about all these amazing trading deals around the World while shutting the door in the enormous market at the back door.

::) Stunning piece of hyperbole!
At worst, trading with the single market will continue on WTO rules. At best access will be granted with minimal or no tariffs imposed by either side.

DavidL

February 26, 2017, 10:24:31 am #680 Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 10:29:37 am by DavidL
Quote from: Slim on February 24, 2017, 15:29:53 pm
LOL well at the very least I would have substituted that "when" in the third-last sentence for an "if". Otherwise there's a real danger that poor old Nick Cohen will turn out to be a 'superliar' himself.
Yes another Remoaner with a better crystal ball than anyone else - sore loser.

DavidL

Quote from: döm on February 26, 2017, 01:14:21 am
There was certainly no mention of the Single Market or the Customs Union on the ballot paper.

No need for that, it was implied by both sides that leaving the single market and customs union would be a result of leaving the EU. Of course, this argument was made mostly by the Remain side as they insisted it would be the cause of millions of job losses and economic disaster if Leave won.

döm

Quote from: DavidL on February 26, 2017, 10:22:04 am
::) Stunning piece of hyperbole!
At worst, trading with the single market will continue on WTO rules. At best access will be granted with minimal or no tariffs imposed by either side.



Hyperbole? WTO rules would have a devastating effect.


I can't believe May is even considering them. It will be hugely damaging to the country.
You can check out any time you like but you can never leave!

döm

Quote from: DavidL on February 26, 2017, 10:42:27 am
No need for that, it was implied by both sides that leaving the single market and customs union would be a result of leaving the EU. Of course, this argument was made mostly by the Remain side as they insisted it would be the cause of millions of job losses and economic disaster if Leave won.



Yes because the debate was conducted with such honesty and clarity throughout! People didn't have a clue what or who to believe.


It probably couldn't have appeared on the ballot paper as it would have made it very confusing. That's why it shouldn't have been a matter to be decided by referendum anyway.
You can check out any time you like but you can never leave!

Ian Harris

February 26, 2017, 12:17:56 pm #684 Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 12:21:45 pm by Ian Harris
Quote from: Slim on February 26, 2017, 00:33:55 am
What Boris said was that £350m a week could be freed up for "our priorities such as the NHS", which remains entirely correct. What he didn't say that he would personally guarantee how the government would spend it. He wasn't the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time.



Boris spoke from a platform next to a banner with the text: 'We send the EU £350m a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.' Gisela Stuart, who represented Leave on TV debates, said "Every week we send £350m to Brussels. I'd rather that we control how to spend that money, and if I had that control I would spend it on the NHS." There's no ambiguity. Defending it digs you a deeper hole. Let's just accept they reneged on a pledge and move on. They're not the first politicians to do that, and they won't be the last.

Quote from: Slim on February 26, 2017, 00:33:55 amAnd a vote to leave was all of these things - to reduce immigration, to repatriate our laws, to leave the single market, depending on the individual voter. Many supporters of Leave went to great lengths to insist that immigration was a pressing concern.


None of those things appeared on the ballot paper. If they had, we could use the results. But they didn't. As is well documented, several prominent Leavers said they wanted to stay in the Single Market. Daniel Hannan: 'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'. Owen Patterson: 'Only a madman would actually leave the Single Market.' Others - Farage, Banks - told us the Norwegian model (in the Single Market) was the way to go. What they say now is not what they said then. Boris even reassured us we still had access to the Single Market in his Telegraph article on 26 June.

Quote from: Slim on February 26, 2017, 00:33:55 amIn reality it was more than [a vote to leave the EU].



Nice try, but no. *In post-hoc conversations, columns and punditry, and without any confirmation at any ballot box*, the referendum was about other issues. This blurring of opinion with reality is what led some - hello Daily Mail - to decide the supreme court judges to be perverting the will of the people, or other such nonsense. The actual reality, blindingly obvious to anyone with proper knowledge of the law, was that the Government would lose its case, however much it harrumphed and asserted.

Quote from: Slim on February 26, 2017, 00:33:55 amFor example, both sides made clear that it would mean leaving the single market so no-one can pretend that the Leave voters weren't voting for this. The government has not merely a mandate but a duty to ensure that this referendum pledge is carried out.


Not so for Leave, as above. Remain said a vote to leave could result in us leaving the Single Market - not, we must leave the Single Market if we vote leave. If you can find anything about leaving the Single Market on the ballot paper, do share. And explain why the Government has a duty to deliver one pledge you like, but can bat aside another (the £350m) you don't.

My overall point is this. The only decision voted on was to leave. Anything else is political debate and ongoing negotiation. Fact's a fact from Nome to Rome.
London, May 1987
Birmingham, May 1987
London, Apr 1992
Paris, May 1992
Sacramento, Feb 1994
San Francisco, Feb 1994
Raleigh, Jul 2002
London, Sep 2004
London, Sep 2004
Manchester, Sep 2004
London, Oct 2008
Birmingham, Oct 2008
Birmingham, May 2011
London, May 2011
Birmingham, 2013
London, 2013

DavidL

Quote from: döm on February 26, 2017, 10:44:53 am

Hyperbole? WTO rules would have a devastating effect.


I can't believe May is even considering them. It will be hugely damaging to the country.
"shutting the door" ?

döm

Quote from: DavidL on February 26, 2017, 13:58:04 pm
"shutting the door" ?



Not to say the door can't be opened. Just that a key will now need to be paid for.
You can check out any time you like but you can never leave!

Slim

Quote from: döm on February 26, 2017, 01:14:21 am
There was certainly no mention of the Single Market or the Customs Union on the ballot paper.


No, explicit and unambiguous assurances were given to the electors by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer as well as leading figures on the Leave side.

QuoteThe Tories are going headlong into their own ideological version of Brexit with little regard for the likely damaging economic consequences.


Nope - we're just delivering the clean Brexit that the voters had every right to expect.

QuoteTalking about all these amazing trading deals around the World while shutting the door in the enormous market at the back door.


Again, no. We'll undoubtedly continue to trade with the European Union countries, almost certainly on agreeable terms. Capitalism is fairly ruthless and unsentimental, and has no time for making sacrifices in the name of punishment.


Truly bizarre!

Slim

Quote from: Ian Harris on February 26, 2017, 12:17:56 pm

Boris spoke from a platform next to a banner with the text: 'We send the EU £350m a week. Let's fund the NHS instead.'


And as I believe I've pointed out already in this thread, Len McCluskey said "Let's make Brexit the moment to break with neo-liberal economics".

I don't think that's going to happen. Has he lied to you? No-one supposed that Boris or anyone in the Vote Leave campaign held a position of influence in the Treasury, so why on Earth would you take that as a promise, rather than what it was; a plea?

Just another example of the lamentable and despicable dishonesty on the part of the Remain campaign. I do wish the referendum could have been fought more honestly, not least because the vote to Leave would probably have been closer to 60% than 52%.


Slim

Quote from: Ian Harris on February 26, 2017, 12:17:56 pmNot so for Leave, as above. Remain said a vote to leave could result in us leaving the Single Market - not, we must leave the Single Market if we vote leave. If you can find anything about leaving the Single Market on the ballot paper, do share. And explain why the Government has a duty to deliver one pledge you like, but can bat aside another (the £350m) you don't.


This is all too easy, Ian. Firstly, you're quite wrong - the Leave campaign made clear that a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Boris Johnson said so, Michael Gove said so, both unequivocally. Andrea Leadsom said that it would "almost certainly" mean leaving the single market. Having made the consequences explicit it would be an appalling betrayal of the voters to attempt to remain in the single market.

There was no pledge to divert £350m of EU money to the NHS, as I show in my previous post above.