UK in/out referendum on the EU (Brexit vs Bremain)

As I gather this means two things:

First, a brexit deal must be voted on and passed by parliament before coming into effect.

"MPs voted to give Parliament a legal guarantee of a vote on the final Brexit deal struck with Brussels."

"it was backed by the Commons, meaning a new Act of Parliament will have to be passed before ministers can implement the withdrawal deal struck with Brussels."

However, second, art. 50 is still in effect, and unless it is withdrawn, which it can be, after the two year period ends, the UK will leave the EU without a exit agreement or a future trade deal.

{{Means she could come back with a deal and parliament can reject it. Given the slim majority, and all the differing factions in her own party, not to mention keeping the DUP happy and the devolved administrations, its going to make her job even harder.
Now best she can say to Brussels is 'I agree to that but I'll need to check with Parliament first before I can say for definite.' And that will be the case for everything negotiated from now till the end. It has to go to a vote now, whatever deal she comes back with. }}}

{{This an interesting one- the Scottish fishing sector is one of the stronger proponents of Brexit in Scotland, mainly due to how awfully Westminster has negotiated the fishing tariffs over the decades with the EU (Scotland has 90% of the UK fishing fleet and fishing grounds but has never had any direct representation at the negotiations on fishing!).
But now with a hard Brexit seeming more likely and even possibly falling back on WTO rules they are not so happy.

The main problem is with shell fishing, a large and lucrative sector of our fishing market. Right now shellfish caught in Scottish waters can be on restaurant tables in the Mediterranean within 48 of being taken from the sea. This is hugely important for shellfish as they dont stay fresh for long and are dangerous once not fresh.
If we leave the customs union and internal market then we cant sell our product to mainland Europe without it first being checked over by health and safety types and vets in the countries being sold too- this obviously increases costs but more crucially greatly increases the time it takes. }}

' The Scottish Creel Fishermen’s Federation (SCFF), in a submission to Holyrood’s Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, says the ramifications of a no-deal Brexit, with hard borders and tariffs, could make it pointless for Scotland’s fishermen to go out to sea.
SCFF’s economist suggests the cost of fishing could jump by between 40 and 90 per cent – making it too expensive to fish for shellfish.
“That would be a crying shame, as we have some of the world’s best shellfish,” SCFF national co-ordinator Alistair Sinclair told The National. “We’re all in a state of limbo, because there seems to be a power struggle in the Conservative Party in Whitehall.”
The SCFF also expresses fears about tariffs, through which the exporters of Scottish fish to another county would have to pay customs duties to make sure that country’s locally-produced fare has a price advantage. The organisation’s economist notes the tariffs applied by the EU on non-members without a specific trade deal range from zero per cent to over 80 per cent.
He wrote: “There is no doubt the food sector in the UK would be subject to very high tariffs. For fish and crustaceans the World Trade Organization (WTO) tariff would be nine per cent. For processed meat and fish the figure is 34 per cent.”
The SCFF says this will lead to sales of UK fish and crustaceans in the EU falling by 40 per cent. For sales of processed meat and fish the figure is closer to 90 per cent."- The National

Tbh, i'm past caring about Brexit now, thoroughly bored and fed up with this whole crapfest let's just hurry up and finish the damn thing, the sooner we get this crap over with the sooner we can go about trying to fix the mess it will create...

{{ So today Corbyn makes a speech announcing that Labour now backs staying in a custom union with free movement of trade and goods without tariff and no border in Ireland, but we would still be leaving the EU but Corbyn says we must have a say in EU trade deals, whilst simultaneously not acknowledging the European Court, no free movement of people and the UK having the ability to still make trade deals of its own outside the EU.

Last week the EU accused the Tories after May announced the Government position that the UK government was in a fantasy land where they have their cake and eat it (I'm paraphrasing but that was the sentiment of it).

I think you can add Labour to that accusation too.

What Corbyn is asking for will clearly get a NO from the EU in a variety of languages.
As the BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg put it- 'So, if the EU says we can't have a say in a customs union, and Mr Corbyn says he wouldn't join a union if the UK wasn't given a say, what happens then? Nothing about what outwardly seems a softer Brexit is guaranteed. If the promise is an impossible one, is it really a promise at all?'

And it is an impossible one, both the positions proposed by the two main parties in the UK are a complete dream. They only make any sense, if at all, within the narrow confines of the Brexit debate in the UK where Britannia rules the waves and we will fight them on the beaches and begin a new glorious British Empire of trade deals across the globe. When you take the rest of the EU into account, which apparently the UK conversation has forgotten about, we are asking for the moon on a stick. There is not a single thing being said by either party right now which has any relevance to the reality of withdrawing from the EU.

I dont want Brexit, but if it is going to happen I'd rather they got on with it so we can get an idea of how much shit it leaves us in and how fast we will have to shovel it, but it has to be done with some acceptance of reality.
Right now its not. The UK Brexit position isn't on the same page as the EU, we arent even in the same book, we're on a different shelf, in a different library in another dimension in a different universe where they read by smell! }}

Agreed. I'm not hearing of any back up plans. It sounds like a spoilt brat demanding his or her own way. There doesn't seem to be any compromise or even seeing or meeting halfway. I seriously doubt the UK can hold its own on the Global economy market. Even the British aren't confident of our trade abroad powers. Most of the stuff we do make is shoddy & what isn't shoddy has German or whatever country involved in its creation. Organic things like Salmon & Whisky seem to do ok but most other things have been taken over by Americans or French & production is in other countries, namely Europe.

I hear Cheese is a big seller tho

{{{ Mmmm, one out of the twenty-four should be devolved powers under the devolved settlement Scotland Act, that Westminster says it has plans to keep hold of post Brexit and not devolve as it should legally per the agreement to the Scottish Parliament is 'Hazardous Substances Planning' - 'Planning control relating to the storage of hazardous substances, and handling development proposals for hazardous substances.'

Purely coincidentally I am sure the Guardian reports that the government is just embarking on a search to find a location to put a new large nuclear waste dump. }}}

{{{{ The Tories- delivering the exact opposite of what people who voted for brexit voted for!

'The UK's share of fishing catch will be guaranteed during transition but the UK will, in effect, remain part of the Common Fisheries Policy, yet without a direct say in its rules, until the end of 2020'- BBC

{{Thats not just shafting the fisherman who voted to leave explicitly to have control over British waters but it actually gives away us having any say in fisheries policy at all for the next 2 years! That take some skill- to go in with a plum negotiation item and walk away with less than nothing!
Im not for Brexit but if we are going to have it Id rather someone vaguely competent negotiated the terms please.}}}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Im not for Brexit but if we are going to have it Id rather someone vaguely competent negotiated the terms please.}}}

Asking a bit much of most Tories there Petty I think

{{Good point! }}}

{{So May has split her cabinet into groups to look at how to implement various Brexit options.
Thing is there is a very big elephant in the  Brexit room that makes all talk of it idiotic- Northern Ireland.
As far as I can see the only solutions to the NI issue are all opposed vehemently by someone. And without a solution Brexit is unworkable. Regardless of any other considerations.

Basically there are 3 options.
You put the border between the UK and the EU at the NI/Eire border. That of course is opposed by everyone in NI as its bad for business regardless which side you're on- but particularly unacceptable to the Republican/Catholic side for whom its a poltiical border.

Option 2 you put the border down the Irish Sea and NI stays in the Customs Union with Eire- again this is unacceptable, this time to the Unionists and Protestants who see any steps to join North and South in political/social or by any other means as a step towards Irish reunification.

Option 3 you put the border at NI/Eire but you don't have an actual border, everything is tracked electronically instead with no border checks of any sort whatsoever- the main probelm here is its moon on a stick stuff- no one seems to know how it could be done, if it could be done, or even if the technology even exists to do it.

So the only options on the table are unacceptable, unworkable, pie in the sky or freuqently all three.
And unless they can find a way to get this square peg in its round hole the whole Brexit thing collapses. }}

srsly if JRM becomes the next PM the UK is fuqed. talk about Great Gilead.

Actually, I think option one also violates the Good Friday Agreement. So, it seems playing with peace in Northern Ireland is on the table, at least for the brexiters.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/11/leaveeu-fined-70k-breaches-of-electoral-law-eu-referendum?

Major story of electoral fraud by Leave.EU, matter has been referred to the police, which means evidence must be overwhelming.

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/994822501145432064

Brexit Dividend?

do they think we are idiots or what.- Figg (In the Freedom thread-thought I'd move the conversation here for a reply)



{{{Um yes I think- this chart says a lot- 

- source BBC

So first the Tories have their 'austerity period' and more than cut in half spending on the NHS form previous government levels, then they tell us hey look we are going to put 20billion back in (less than they have taken out!) and its going to come form a Brexit dividend- until today that is when they announced in fact they would be raising taxes for it-

'Mrs May insisted it would free up money.
"Some of the extra funding I am promising will come from using the money we will no longer spend on our annual membership subscription to the European Union after we have left."
However, she added that "taxpayers will have to contribute a bit more in a fair and balanced way to support the NHS we all use".'

So to be clear- first they cut the NHS spending by more than half (closer to one-fifth in the coalition era of the previous health budget) then they promise 20billion from Brexit ( way less than they took out and which no other financial board, institute or level-headed person thinks will exist, as every prediction is Brexit will cost more than it saves) and now they want the tax payer to cough up too.

And where the hell has the money gone? They had years of austerity supposedly to cut the national debt- all we got was all our services turned to shit or removed, more taxes and somehow the country is in more debt than when we started- how? Where's the money gone? Fuck the Tories! }}}

{{ More you hear about this so called Brexit windfall more pathetic it becomes-

'the plan does not include other parts of the wider health budget, such as training, stop-smoking clinics and other preventative services, so the overall "health" increase might be lower than 3.4%.
The average annual rise since the foundation of the NHS in 1948 is 3.7%.'- BBC

So less than the average increase when you factor in everything! Brilliant- and we the taxpayer are expected to not only thank her for this but pay up for it too!! 

edit add- still tying to straighten this out in my head as its a classic bit of Tory fuckery.

So since the NHS was founded the average annual increase is 3.7%- the Tories are boasting they are going to put 20 billion extra into the NHS budget- but some of that will come from higher taxes. But the net result of this will be an annual increase of 3.4%- .3% less! So after putting in the Brexit dividend and increasing taxes we will up the NHS by less than we have done every since 1948? So taxes were previously enough to pay for an average 3.7% annual increase since the thing began, but now we have to pay more taxes to get a 3.4% increase- yeah think we are definitely experiencing a right royal Brexit fucking up the arse from the Tories again here!! }}

people still fall for this shit.

Well, at least your conservatives are willing to increase taxes when they increase spending. Ours say they have to streamline the government, cut programs, put all the savings plus even more into the military so we are at a deficit, then cut taxes saying it will spur the economy so much the government will actually bring in more money.

Of course the liberals kill business in order to fund programs, so pick your poison.

Ours say they have to streamline the government, cut programs, put all the savings plus even more into the military so we are at a deficit- Halfy

{{We've had going on so far 10 years of Austerity budgets doing just that, every year, for ten years, year upon year of trimming ever further department budgets, programs, resources or shutting stuff down altogether- there is nothing left to cut. Well except blackly ironically people, with knives, one of the reasons gang crime and violent crime is up in London among youths as it saw more outreach, rehabilitation, day centers, youth groups, mothers groups shut down as 'savings' than anywhere- ten years later we reap the rewards o that- when they were in place crime was down, but on the balance sheet they just look like an expense, until you get rid of them and the results costs you far more, and sadly often in actual lives.
Many public services after ten years of this are on their knees, and now we have Brexit about to hit us in the face too. }}}

{{I generally agree with him that the issue of sovereignty which should be central is not- but problem was it wasn't during the debate and vote either. We never got a grown up debate about Brexit- we got childish slogans and claims and counter claims and accusations and name calling followed by an angry vote.
What I think the folks who voted on sovereignty really want is to go back to the idea at the beginning- to have a shared trade area with no borders or taxes- but no to political power sharing and having a centralised EU. I think its still the wrong argument- but it is a valid one to make with pros and cons. Its part of the grown up debate about Brexit the countries have yet to have. And sadly its too late now, and because we only had a debate based on slogans and crap we have no direction to follow in our exit because it was never really substantially discussed in the first place. }}

I think he is way off this time. to put it in a nutshell, Leavers voted because they didn't like Pakistanis. that's the harsh truth, leavers are as thick as pig shit.

Well, I do seem to remember years ago you complained about non-assimilated muslims ruining the English culture, Figgs. It may not be outright racism so much as conservatism: keep things the way they used to be.

{{Folk like Reece-Mogg have ben making the sovereignty argument since the beginning- I have no idea how many leave voters really did vote at based on that issue, being in a pro-remain area and pro-remain country its hard to tell, but its certainly a valid argument to have and hold. I dont happen to agree with it but its a fair enough position to have. }}

halfwise wrote:Well, I do seem to remember years ago you complained about non-assimilated muslims ruining the English culture, Figgs.  It may not be outright racism so much as conservatism: keep things the way they used to be.

generally I am a socially liberal lifefelong Labour supporter and I supported Remain as it has ZERO to do with Pakistanis. Why you are conflating the two I don't know, they are totally separate issues. But I believe a large majority of British UKIP voters and Tories thought that leaving would get rid of non-European migrants. I support 100% EU migrants coming to the UK. But brexit has been hijacked by those who use it to get rid of Asians.
when it comes to illegal economic migration from non-EU countries I support the right I suppose that makes me conservative or whatever, and I think like this because I have seen Italy being destroyed by an invasion of Africans, who beg outside every shop, restaurant, supermarket and bar, beach and even outside hospital car parks in every town in Italy. But these are my views about Italy and not the UK, the context is different in the UK, and I do think some non-assimilated muslims are a problem, but I fail to see why that is racist, its their culture of sexist mediaeval views, the sharia law, and the grooming gangs ect, I have a problem with, not the colour of their skin.
The whole problem we have in the West is just this attitude that anyone who questions the muslim culture is a racist, and those who question the Israelis are racist. I object to being called a racist, and I wont tolerate it from anyone.