The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Troublawesome]

	Quote:	22 yards
	What did the EU states unanimously agree in the case of Brexit?

So far...everything? 27 nations talking with 1 voice for 3 years.


Unlike the failed state the UK has been.

[greenmount]

I am quite sure nobody wanted to see UK leaving the EU.

[Dougal's Breakfast]

	Quote:	greenmount
	I am quite sure nobody wanted to see UK leaving the EU.

To be fair, the UK was never a particularly peaceful bedfellow. I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would be privately glad to see the back of us!

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	greenmount
	I am quite sure nobody wanted to see UK leaving the EU.

Sure as the UK were paying loads more money in than they got back. Free money for all what's not to like unless you are the ones paying. Hardly surprising so many wealthy people want out.

[22 yards]

	Quote:	Troublawesome
	So far...everything? 27 nations talking with 1 voice for 3 years. Unlike the failed state the UK has been.

What have all the other 27 states voted unanimously on, with regard to Brexit?

So far, all I've seen is the UK's unilateral triggering of Article 50 (certainly no vote required among the other 27 for that), and negotiations between the UK and the EU's appointed negotiators (again, no vote involved, not even to confirm the finally agreed plan).

[marton]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Sure as the UK were paying loads more money in than they got back. Free money for all what's not to like unless you are the ones paying. Hardly surprising so many wealthy people want out.

Difficult to make this cost estimate as the EU provided a lot of services for this money which will not be available from the EU for the UK after Brexit so the UK will now have to create and provide the same services at UK cost.

A Bloomberg estimate claims the UK will have to set up 50 new agencies to replace EU regulators. Since the UK has less economy of scale than the EU then UK costs are likely to be higher than the equivalent services cost the EU to provide. I mean when you have one agency handling the same regulations for 27 countries then you have an economy of scale that is not available to the UK.

There are many other areas to manage, for example, nine bilateral air services arrangements have been secured by the UK and more are in negotiation.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Sure as the UK were paying loads more money in than they got back. Free money for all what's not to like unless you are the ones paying. Hardly surprising so many wealthy people want out.

Why at any point would you expect it to be otherwise, to start with. The basic idea at all times is a transfer of wealth to the poorer members to help bring them up to the standards fo the wealthier members, your pay off is preferential access to the single market as it grows. Plus of course access to better trade deals that membership of a major trading block brings.

You can make up all the criteria you like to justify membership success. but they were never agreed to by any member not even the UK.

[greenmount]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Sure as the UK were paying loads more money in than they got back. Free money for all what's not to like unless you are the ones paying. Hardly surprising so many wealthy people want out.

This topic has been debated extensively, you know it very well it's not that black and white. Those "free" money aren't for free and aren't for all to begin with....that's why people voted for Brexit after all. The rich will be paying taxes anyhow, don't know how it helps you personally. You'll see that nothing will improve because not EU is the (only) problem. I think it's worse to be outside than part of it...and trust me I've been thinking to this issue a lot. But if you think in these terms, and it's obvious you do, no further discussion will ever change your mind.

[Fish Paste]

My Brexit prediction now is, a long extension, say 2 years, in which time the UK will ‘cancel’ brexit somehow.

Alternative, shorter extension, but the proviso of a second referendum.

They should have taken Mays deal when they had the chance.

[StirB]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	No, that has not true Not even on average including North Sea oil https://fullfact.org/economy/tax-and-spending-scotland/

It is quite a bit more complicated than your graph suggests. For one, this graph includes non-discretionary expenses which Scotland wouldn't incur as an independent country, like HS2 for example, or funding new nuclear submarines (which Scotland was massively against) etc etc.

Secondly, had an independent Scotland been "spending" at the rate we have since 1980, by 2012 we'd have had an estimated £82bn-116bn surplus, which would have been a nice little sovereign fund nest egg.

Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good jock bashing though, eh

[SponPlague]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	The choice of amendments is not based purely upon the number of signatures, and as the amendment you're refering to is the one attempting to block any option of a second referendum, he absolutely did the right thing. There are a few reasons for this, two of which are... 1. It's party of the Labour Party's manifesto as agreed at conference. 2. It's one of the options / scenarios that that the EU have set out as reasonable grounds for an extension to Article 50. If they hadn't tried to combine representative democracy with the tools of direct democracy in the first place (schoolboy error), this wouldn't have been an issue.

It may have been agreed at conference, but it wasn’t inthe manifesto put to the electorate, on which basis the current Labour MPs were voted in...

[Mikers]

	Quote:	Fish Paste
	My Brexit prediction now is, a long extension, say 2 years, in which time the UK will ‘cancel’ brexit somehow. Alternative, shorter extension, but the proviso of a second referendum. They should have taken Mays deal when they had the chance.

I’d go more direct: it’s Mays deal next week or end of Brexit, pure and simple. What’s a bit sad is I think mays deal will pass next week now they are paying off the DUP so it’s all end in a bit of a damp squib with a fairly shit deal leaving us as just like we were before, but with a bit less of a say on things.

Brexit cancel would be more sensible.

[marton]

	Quote:	Mikers
	I’d go more direct: it’s Mays deal next week or end of Brexit, pure and simple. What’s a bit sad is I think mays deal will pass next week now they are paying off the DUP so it’s all end in a bit of a damp squib with a fairly shit deal leaving us as just like we were before, but with a bit less of a say on things. Brexit cancel would be more sensible.

Sadly, how true.

Why it is OK to have three votes on May's deal but not a second referendum is kind of strange!

[Troublawesome]

	Quote:	marton
	Sadly, how true. Why it is OK to have three votes on May's deal but not a second referendum is kind of strange!

It's hypocrisy and a betrayal of electorate trust. They didn't really mean Take Back Control, as apparently the Parliament isn't supposed to have it. They meant probably the ERG takes control of the country, mafia-style.


If she's allowed to have the same crappy deal that everyone hates then a second referendum or a general election should be called ASAP.


I wish Becrow blocks this crap, this is a travesty of democracy as vote3 will be identical to vote2. At least vote2 vs vote1 had a shred of change on it, this is copy paste.


Businesses having another 2 years of uncertainty is the WORST scenario, perhaps even compared to No Deal. Because in case of the latter, a few weeks into the chaos they'll rush back to the table and capitulate. 2 more years of uncertainty and the majority of companies that are capable will move HQ and many SMEs will close for good.


Unbelievable that the UK is self-inflicting such amount of economic damage to itself for the most BS reason ever, ironic how they will end up afterwards with even less control as a rule taker from both the EU and the US/Japan.


At this point if this deal is not done, Brexit will be cancelled for sure.

[jacek]

I like eating my chicken and it is not gonna end up well.

https://www.fin24.com/Economy/risk-o...ement-20190317

There is also a positive aspect:

"South Africa should be looking to negotiate a deal with the UK to ensure that SPS measures are not unfairly used to keep our chicken out of UK shops," Baird said. "That would give workers in our poultry industry something to celebrate – breast meat in particular sells at a premium and South Africa can supply this at competitive prices."

[Fish Paste]

I think, it’s second referendum time.

Now we’ve seen the ERG clearly, the £350m a week, immigration is 2/3 non-EU anyway and May cannot stop/unwilling to stop/unwilling to explain why that is, movement of HQ’s, etc etc, all the Brexiteers jumping ship, how far the EU are willing to go.

Stay in the EU unless there is a 65% vote to leave.

Would be a good time to clear out all the MPs who didn’t act with integrity, so most of them.
After this clusterfeckfest, we’d be safer governed from the EU anyway, we just don’t have the quality of leadership required.

Note: I voted for Brexit.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Fish Paste
	I think, it’s second referendum time.

And what would be the point of another non binding referendum? It would not change the situation in parliament.

You either have a sovereign people or a sovereign parliament, not both.

	Quote:	Fish Paste
	Would be a good time to clear out all the MPs who didn’t act with integrity, so most of them.

I doubt very much you will see much change. MPs tend to follow the local party line, that is what gets them re-elected. A do not believe many of them are off freelancing on this.

[Dougal's Breakfast]

	Quote:	Fish Paste
	I think, it’s second referendum time. Now we’ve seen the ERG clearly, the £350m a week, immigration is 2/3 non-EU anyway and May cannot stop/unwilling to stop/unwilling to explain why that is, movement of HQ’s, etc etc, all the Brexiteers jumping ship, how far the EU are willing to go. Stay in the EU unless there is a 65% vote to leave. Would be a good time to clear out all the MPs who didn’t act with integrity, so most of them. After this clusterfeckfest, we’d be safer governed from the EU anyway, we just don’t have the quality of leadership required. Note: I voted for Brexit.

I agree. It was a wonderful opportunity wantonly squandered.

... or deliberately sabotaged.

My gut says the latter. My brain says the former.

It makes me sick to say it, but this Brexit shouldn't be happening.

I always suspected it was impossible.

[Fish Paste]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	And what would be the point of another non binding referendum? It would not change the situation in parliament.

Stay in the EU unless there is a 60-65% vote to leave, make it binding.

The burning of the MPs will take place at the next election regardless.

[Sandgrounder]

	Quote:	Dougal's Breakfast
	I agree. It was a wonderful opportunity wantonly squandered. ... or deliberately sabotaged. My gut says the latter. My brain says the former. It makes me sick to say it, but this Brexit shouldn't be happening. I always suspected it was impossible.

I think I’ve said it before on the thread but in principle I would agree with the UK leaving but from the outset it has been on a hiding to nothing. Cameron’s vanity project, every preening self-serving gobshite in parliament seeing it as a golden opportunity to publicise themselves and/or further their business interests or make money off the back of it. The whole thing stank from the get-go.

Just amazed people are still swallowing it all and think the ‘will of the people’ was even a consideration.