Let's Get Political!

[Bathtime]

Why the clamour for a second referendum didn`t we get it wrong the first time around..? Whose to say we the public will fuck it up again?
How come we don`t hear much about the £ 39 billion we won`t have to pay if we leave without an agreement..?

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

One for SRK to get his teeth into

https://www.facebook.com/1019493592/posts/10216063871802465/

[pauld]

How come we don`t hear much about the £ 39 billion we won`t have to pay if we leave without an agreement..?

Because we do have to pay it. It's money we have already committed to pay before Brexit. If we try to get out of paying that, we are saying as a nation that any agreement we enter into with other nations is worthless as we will renege on our side of it at our own whim. Good luck trying to come to all those lovely Free Trade deals the Brexiteers keep promising will make the milk and honey flow if we do that.

[Batch]

How come we don`t hear much about the £ 39 billion we won`t have to pay if we leave without an agreement..?

How come we don't hear the IMFs best case no deal affect on GDP is 5% v staying in?

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

I wonder how things would have turned out if Thatcher was in charge of this.

Now, that would have been fun watching.

[Reg Smeeton]

I wonder how things would have turned out if Thatcher was in charge of this.

Now, that would have been fun watching.

Thatcher was very keen on the single market, she felt it one of the UK's success stories within the EU.

[Outletred]

Because we do have to pay it. It's money we have already committed to pay before Brexit. If we try to get out of paying that, we are saying as a nation that any agreement we enter into with other nations is worthless as we will renege on our side of it at our own whim. Good luck trying to come to all those lovely Free Trade deals the Brexiteers keep promising will make the milk and honey flow if we do that.

Wrong. Legally we do not owe them a penny- the house of lords committee have proved this.

Morally we should pay something but I would only do this non receipt of a satisfactory trade deal.

[RobertT]

Because we do have to pay it. It's money we have already committed to pay before Brexit. If we try to get out of paying that, we are saying as a nation that any agreement we enter into with other nations is worthless as we will renege on our side of it at our own whim. Good luck trying to come to all those lovely Free Trade deals the Brexiteers keep promising will make the milk and honey flow if we do that.

Yep, why on earth would we bother paying for an invoice we already signed?  madness, it's like it might have some sort of negative impact on sorting out a trade deal with one of the biggest trade blocks in the world.

We equally will not be paying any contributions to the EU, so we will be able to fund the extra border controls, immigration civil servants and trade negotiators.

I do wish people would stop dragging out pointless data to try and support what is an entirely ideological reason to leave the EU.  Economic history is clear - free or near free trade creates wealth as we know it.  Trade limits reduce that.  Not being in the EU WILL have immediate negative economic/financial impacts to the UK.  People just need to get over that, it will happen.  To what extent is  unknown.

Set that to one side, you voted out because you do not agree with the principles of the EU.  That's fine, if that is your personal belief.  If the sovereignty of the UK as we know it today is so important to you (not you PaulD) then you are right to want to now be in the EU.

[RedRag]

Wrong. Legally we do not owe them a penny- the house of lords committee have proved this.

Morally we should pay something but I would only do this non receipt of a satisfactory trade deal.

Sorry Outlet but the House of Lords Committee found that the "better" legal opinion was the view that there was no legal obligation to make a payment.  I can discuss the alternative view and why it is to be preferred whilst accepting that, as with so much law, there is no black and white answer.

Once again confident dissemination of fake facts and absolutes by a leaver who either doesn't quite have a handle on the intricacies or chooses to ignore them.  The House of Lords Committee didn't even contain one law Lord (or even a practising or former practising lawyer) and wouldn't even influence our own Supreme Court.

The matter would certainly be litigated, there would be claims not only for what was due but costs, interest, consequentiual damages possibly as well as serious reputational damage to the UK's reliability on treaties.  That isn't a great look for Trump's USA but for a middling economy to risk being found welching on treaty agreements wouldn't be a good look at all.

[RedRag]

Our democracy is flawed, but it's the only one we have, and it's better than the alternatives sought by those on the right.

A bit like Dunkirk, everything will work out fine though, similar to local Tory leader Renard, HMG is making contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit, civil breakdown in April. Williamson is going to mobilise 3500 troops.

In all seriousness, we've left it way too late.

My money is on the Withdrawal Agreement (with a clarification or two) passing.

I'd love a referendum and a remain outcome (obviously at a price of something like SRK and Legends donning their "gilets jaunes"  and perhaps worse)

Some would love a no deal.  Although the chaos could be sort of funny (with perhaps less deaths than Project Fear estimated), there could be some real losers here, amongst the vulnerable, as usual.  Those prepared to die on the hill of Brexit won't actually be the ones to suffer.

[pauld]

Wrong. Legally we do not owe them a penny- the house of lords committee have proved this.

1) RedRag has already set out why that doesn't count for shit
2) Even if it did, like I say, good luck striking any trade deals with anyone if we try to welch on the money our government have always admitted we owe the EU

[Combe Up]

I believe in democracy, even if some people using an STFC former manager's name do not. The referendum for the UK to leave the EU was clearly won by a majority of 1,269,501.

Let's start counting one of those people per second as we imagine they walk by us. That would take over two weeks, i.e. on New Year's Day we would still be counting those people. Let's bear that in mind as we continue to debate this into 2019.

Some people are bad losers; get over it!

Still counting? One person per second remember, ever since my above post yesterday. There are still over 1.1 million people to walk by. One EVERY second into 2019.

Despite mind-reading attempts as to what people should have or wanted to vote for, all those people gave a majority for the UK to leave the EU. Remoaners, remainiacs etc - time to swing behind the leaving process and unify the country.

[Batch]

Remoaners, remainiacs etc - time to swing behind the leaving process and unify the country.

That's not going to happen. Its like saying a lot of people want to shoot themselves in the foot, so lets all do it for the sake of unity.

[pauld]

Remoaners, remainiacs etc - time to swing behind the leaving process and unify the country.

A call for unity might go better if you didn't start it by insulting the people you want to unite behind you?

[Ardiles]

Despite mind-reading attempts as to what people should have or wanted to vote for, all those people gave a majority for the UK to leave the EU. Remoaners, remainiacs etc - time to swing behind the leaving process and unify the country.

Much as I understand the need to pull things together at some point, I can't 'swing behind' Brexit - because it goes against just about everything that I believe in.

If there was a vote narrowly in favour of everyone supporting Oxford United, I'd swerve that as well...and suspect that you would too.  Brexit is your baby, not mine.  Swing behind it all you like, but I'll be watching on.