Cable Forum - Brexit discussion

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Brexit discussion (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33705369)

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35917545)

I thought you guys were arguing for a transition period rather than a 'hard Brexit'!

Theresa can't do anything right for some, it seems, even if she gives them exactly what they've asked for!

Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.

Thankfully some practical common sense has prevailed as there was not much up to yesterday.

---------- Post added at 11:26 ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35917545)

I thought you guys were arguing for a transition period rather than a 'hard Brexit'!

Theresa can't do anything right for some, it seems, even if she gives them exactly what they've asked for!

Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.

Personally l just don't think she is up to the job as we have her and Corbyn as the opposition leader and they are IMHO both absolutely useless.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35917545)

I thought you guys were arguing for a transition period rather than a 'hard Brexit'!

Theresa can't do anything right for some, it seems, even if she gives them exactly what they've asked for!

Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.

I'm not going to speak for Mr K, however for the first time in a while the right tone was struck.

That said, all was very vague. We're still very light on details. A few concessions were made to the EU and it's very clear the UK still hasn't settled on what we actually want.

Those most upset over the speech seem to be those who've been listening to Boris and those at the extremes of the leave campaigns who were under the impression it would be easy and that no deal was a viable option on the table.

At the extremes I probably have to include the man in charge of DExEU given his statements from the middle of 2016.

---------- Post added at 11:44 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35917511)

A 2 year extension? During which time we pretend we're not in the EU but are in all but name. Sounds as though she really doesn't want to leave at all. Don't blame her, the more delay the more time for us to see sense.

This is a tricky one.

Theresa May is hard to read on this one. She's strongly against immigration, so wants out of FoM, however she and the Party have an awful lot of influential people bending their ear. She has also seen the various impact assessments that the Government see fit to deny us, which implies their contents isn't good.

She was a waste of space as Home Secretary for the most part. An ideologue who was ineffective at most things bar cutting services. Someone who preferred to spend time getting publicity for standing up to the ECJ and ECtHR than actually getting her job done.

The request for a 2 year extension is simply required. The UK falling out of the EU onto WTO terms would harm the UK economy profoundly according to most commentators, so remaining in the SM/CU until such a deal can be put in place is important. I also note it was mentioned as 'about' 2 years. This is likely extraordinarily optimistic if we are to get the kind of trade deal the UK needs, but has been left open-ended.

If this means a more pragmatic tone going forward this is good for the UK. You can also chill on the negativity a bit. This means we're not even a quarter of the way through the process, and that more sensible voices have prevailed with the ridiculous claims that they need us more than we need them and we can drop onto WTO terms and immediately see our trade burst into the stratosphere have been abandoned. WTO terms would carry a heavy price for the UK, a far less acute one for the EU.

That said, it's worth keeping an open mind on everything for right now. We still have no idea what our actual endgame is.

This is somewhat conspiracy theory, well more than somewhat, but an interesting read: https://veritasetlibertasdeannolxxxi.../2017/05/30/5/

EDIT: Something that was interesting about the speech on more thought is how she wanted to place some responsibility on the EU for making the process a success. I think this is in vain - their opinion on the whole is that it's our mess and we should be the ones fixing it, and that's a perfectly reasonable position to take. Their thoughts on the matter are abundantly clear by those in audience for that speech - British politicians and mostly British journalists. Foreign dignitaries were invited and declined.

---------- Post added at 11:50 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Heh. The UK Government is promoting May's speech with paid-for tweets in European languages. Dutch and German I've seen so far.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35917549)

Osem can't read this of course, but this is more for the wider audience, fact checking the man is fun regardless.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/brex...ted-kingdom_en

Spot on.
The EU has published its agreed position in the key areas but the UK is still struggling. It's hard to negotiate with one side that doesn't have an agreed position and that's a stumbling block at the moment. There seems to be more negotiation going on within the Conservative Party on Brexit than going on between the EU and the UK. That's clearly the EU's fault.;)

---------- Post added at 12:18 ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35917550)

Personally, l just don't think she is up to the job as we have her and Corbyn as the opposition leader and they are IMHO both absolutely useless.

There certainly seems to be a dearth of political talent at the moment. Bring on the next generation!

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35917562)

There certainly seems to be a dearth of political talent at the moment. Bring on the next generation!

You are not wrong there.

The current PM's lack of vision & understanding is staggering:

Theresa May tells EU leaders they have 'profound responsibility' to next generation to make Brexit deal work

Unbelievable. The "next generation" as she describes them did not want this fiasco in the first place ..

---------- Post added at 13:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:54 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35917549)

Osem can't read this of course, but this is more for the wider audience, fact checking the man is fun regardless.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/brex...ted-kingdom_en

Hang on, are you one of those "usual suspects only ever have time to talk the UK down, rubbish our own side and suck up, without question, the usual Brussels propaganda like suckling pigs at the teat" and also "desperate, duplicitous and despicable" ? :)

He can't see this either :waving:

Re: Brexit discussion

If we are talking about May and the Government not being able to do right for doing wrong Moody's just downgraded the UK's credit rating, citing inability to keep fiscal control after the unnecessary General Election took their majority away, and today's speech and earlier actions increasing the chances of a 'no deal' outcome.

On the upside the UK outlook is now stable. Our economic outlook is similar to nations with our new rating.

---------- Post added at 13:16 ---------- Previous post was at 13:14 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35917571)

Proudly.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35917577)

For the record, these currently are:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/List_of_...ing#/Moody.27s

Quote:

France
Hong Kong
Kuwait
Qatar
South Korea
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35917545)

Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.

A transition period is not a given right. It still has to be negotiated with the EU.
Have the negotiations been unblocked by Theresa May's speech?
From Sky News

Quote:

France's president Emmanuel Macron called for clarity, saying: "Before we move forward, we want to clarify matters concerning the settlement of European citizens, the financial terms of exit and the question of Ireland.
"If these three points are not clarified, we will not be able to advance on the rest."

http://news.sky.com/story/may-told-c...dlock-11047985

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35917594)

For the record, these currently are:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/List_of_...ing#/Moody.27s

Not a bad bunch to be in league with economically, actually.

Re: Brexit discussion

Moody's pulled no punches when it discussed the UK's future relationship with the EU.

Quote:

Moody's is no longer confident that the UK government will be able to secure a replacement free trade agreement with the EU which substantially mitigates the negative economic impact of Brexit,” it said, adding that any negotiated outcome was likely to be significantly worse that Britain’s current arrangements.

https://www.ft.com/content/3ecfa8f2-...4-932067fbf946

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35917271)

What matters is he was pulled up for misusing official statistics a full year and more after the campaign he fronted was pulled up for the exact same thing with the exact same statistic.

Pulled up incorrectly in this case. :shrug:

Quote:

Sir David Norgrove, the chairman of the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA), is an honourable man. When he publicly rebuked Boris Johnson for his use of the famous £350 million figure about our weekly EU contribution, I am sure he was statistically, not party-politically motivated.
But two points occur. The first is that Sir David was, arguably, mistaken. He thinks Boris said that, after Brexit, Britain would have £350 million a week more to spend. He didn’t. He said ‘we will take back control of roughly £350 million a week’. This is correct. So long as we are in the EU, that £350 million a week is out of our control, because even our rebate, which forms part of that figure, is EU-dependent. When we leave, it will all be under our control.

Re: Brexit discussion

The interesting thing about Boris's article is that he apparently wrote it due to a misunderstanding with Theresa May. He felt that Theresa May wanted a Swiss-style deal with ongoing contributions to the EU in order to access the single market. In fact, Theresa May does not want such an arrangement.

Quote:

Johnson’s aim in his article was to head off the idea that continuing payments for something like single market membership, such as those made by Norway and Switzerland, were acceptable as a long-term arrangement. Hence what he thought was the most important line: “We would not expect to pay for access to their markets any more than they would expect to pay for access to ours.”
But she agrees with him: she thinks that wouldn’t deliver what the British people voted for in the referendum. She is prepared to pay for specific programmes, such as Europol and Erasmus, but not a general fee for privileged access to the single market...
But her lack of clarity, as much as Johnson’s paranoia, caused a supposed cabinet split where there probably wasn’t one.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a7959971.html

---------- Post added at 18:32 ---------- Previous post was at 18:06 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 35917622)

Pulled up incorrectly in this case. :shrug:

Best to get the analysis of an unbiased fact-checking service on issues like this.
https://fullfact.org/europe/foreign-...ion-explained/

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 35917622)

Pulled up incorrectly in this case. :shrug:

Yes it's not rocket science is it but some people insist on twisting the facts and conflating what's been said with what was written on the side of a bus during the campaign, to suit their own agenda. Boris's actual words are there for all to see. Crystal clear.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35917634)

A pro-Brexit magazine agrees with you. An impartial fact-checking source disagrees with you.

Quote:

£350 million EU claim "a clear misuse of official statistics"
Claim: After leaving the EU, we will take back control of roughly £350 million per week.
Conclusion This is wrong, it’s more like £250 million a week. In any case the impact on the economy from changes to trade after leaving the EU is likely to be far bigger than savings from the UK’s membership fee.

https://fullfact.org/europe/350-mill...hority-misuse/

Quote:

Fullfact.org We don't take sides in any debate and don't support any political party or campaign. We've been quoted by politicians on all sides and corrected people on all sides. We have a cross-party Board of Trustees and safeguards in place at every level of our organisation to ensure our neutrality.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35917634)

Yes it's not rocket science is it but some people insist on twisting the facts and conflating what's been said with what was written on the side of a bus during the campaign, to suit their own agenda. Boris's actual words are there for all to see. Crystal clear

Yes £350m worth of lies again. The bloke is an incompetent clown. Like many of the ultra Brexiters he's too rich for Brexit to have any significant consequences.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35917634)

Yep agreed. No lies were made.

His words were, let's give most of that "gross" figure. Key word here is gross.

Other key words are "Let's give." It's a suggestion. Not a concrete promise.