The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[chalga]

This is simply not true.

 

The EU is determined to impose a a very large financial settlement on the UK in order to deter other member states from leaving. A senior MEP, Hans-Olaf Henkel (the Deputy Head of the European Parliament's Industry, Research and Energy committee) has even gone on record as stating:

 

“I have the impression, by their public statements, that indeed they would like to set an example [EU negotiators].

 

They want to punish Britain and make sure that no-one else is leaving the European Union.

 

The reason is simple. They would seek to make sure that Brexit is such a catastrophe that no country dares to take the step of leaving the EU again."

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2017 at 08:52 ----------

 

 

Again, this is not accurate.

 

A House of Lords Select Committee that oversees British EU policy were warned back in January 2016, in Brussels, that if the UK voted to leave in the referendum then the EU would force a draconian Brexit deal in a bid to deter other countries from leaving.

 

“My concern is that if we vote to leave that the deal we’d be given would be such that no one else would want to leave. We would bear the brunt of the angry other 27 EU countries,” Catherine Bearder, a British Liberal Democrat MEP said at the time.

 

The EU had threatened the UK that if we didn't vote to remain, we would face a financial punishment beating. What a lovely club to be a member!

 

Nothing stopping you or any other country from walking away for nothing,right now,or whenever another country chooses to do it...............you've had over a year to do it and you're still hanging around trying to get a cake and eat it.............what's the problem with you,and why are you not out of the door yet if you don't wan to pay your commitments?.............show some guts and walk away,if you have any.

I'm just puzzled and need somebody to explain exactly why,with the out door wide open,the UK can just not simply walk through it and away.

We've had the right wing politicians,the right wing media and their sycophants treat the EU,the countries and their people with utter contempt for years now with their jingoism and xenophobia,but still they hang around wanting to do business and trade with people that they hate...............why?,it's the epitome of two facedness,like a shopkeeper hating their customers but still wanting their business.

Edited November 5, 2017 by chalga

[retep]

The Guardian:-

https://www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/2017/jul/25/guardian-media-group-plc-gmg-results-for-the-financial-year-ended-2-april-2017

 

"Guardian Media Group plc (GMG) results for the financial year ended 2 April 2017

 

Revenues up 2% supported by more than 400,000 paying readers and good international growth

Operating losses reduced by more than a third

Record digital readership

Total value of endowment and cash now over £1 billion"

 

 

EU:-

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/04/brexit-european-union-negotiations/

"Brexit could be the best thing that happened to the European Union"

 

They're not begginng, they're holding us to our commitments, they hold all the cards. No deal would be far worse for the UK than a bad deal, and they know it.

 

So, wrong on both counts.

 

The Guardian wasn't involved in the US's objection to the WTO, they merely reported it. Let me guess, this wasn't reported in The Express.... LOL

 

Simple and short,

"Make a one-off

contribution today"

https://contribute.theguardian.com/uk

[Magilla]

Simple and short,

"Make a one-off

contribution today"

https://contribute.theguardian.com/uk

 

Not crumbling though, are they?

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2017 at 09:27 ----------

 

This is simply not true.

 

The EU is determined to impose a a very large financial settlement on the UK in order to deter other member states from leaving. A senior MEP, Hans-Olaf Henkel (the Deputy Head of the European Parliament's Industry, Research and Energy committee) has even gone on record as stating:

 

“I have the impression, by their public statements, that indeed they would like to set an example [EU negotiators].

 

They want to punish Britain and make sure that no-one else is leaving the European Union.

 

The reason is simple. They would seek to make sure that Brexit is such a catastrophe that no country dares to take the step of leaving the EU again."

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2017 at 08:52 ----------

 

 

Again, this is not accurate.

 

A House of Lords Select Committee that oversees British EU policy were warned back in January 2016, in Brussels, that if the UK voted to leave in the referendum then the EU would force a draconian Brexit deal in a bid to deter other countries from leaving.

 

“My concern is that if we vote to leave that the deal we’d be given would be such that no one else would want to leave. We would bear the brunt of the angry other 27 EU countries,” Catherine Bearder, a British Liberal Democrat MEP said at the time.

 

The EU had threatened the UK that if we didn't vote to remain, we would face a financial punishment beating. What a lovely club to be a member!

 

The EU is going to show that it was better to be a member than not, this was never a secret. If you chose to see that as a "punishment", then so be it. Looking at the date you provided with one of your posts, you knew exactly what was coming before you voted, so why are you whining about it now?

 

The EU27 have a mandate from their electorate to drive a hard bargain. What you're really upset about is that they haven't rolled over and given us everything on a plate like Boris promised they would. What's' really amazing is that you clearly believed him!

 

It's no good moaning now because UK has no cards to play, you knew that before the vote.

 

This so called "punishment" was fully known before the vote, and presumably accepted since leave won, so it's not a "punishment" rather a "consequence" of our actions. You can blame the EU all you want and cry your false tears all over this forum, but the reality is that should the shoe be on the other foot, the UK would be doing *exactly* the same.

 

Again, if anything Vote Leave said were true before the vote, then the EU isn't in a position to "punish" us, so which is it?

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2017 at 09:29 ----------

 

Would that be the same Gina Miller who said that about 3 years ago she was potless and living in a 1 bedroom flat with her children eating beans and toast all the time and now she is very wealthy , through her hard work . If it is ,I will start believing anything Jeremy Corbyn says

 

No, must be another one, this one was the one who's legal challenge met with a "torrent" of abuse from some of those supporting Brexit, including racial abuse and death threats.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Magilla

[L00b]

A House of Lords Select Committee that oversees British EU policy were warned back in January 2016, in Brussels, that if the UK voted to leave in the referendum then the EU would force a draconian Brexit deal in a bid to deter other countries from leaving.

 

“My concern is that if we vote to leave that the deal we’d be given would be such that no one else would want to leave. We would bear the brunt of the angry other 27 EU countries,” Catherine Bearder, a British Liberal Democrat MEP said at the time.

 

The EU had threatened the UK that if we didn't vote to remain, we would face a financial punishment beating. What a lovely club to be a member!

On the topic of a 'draconian bill',

 

(i) the worst possible 'deal' for the UK, is for there to be no deal; and

(ii) the best possible 'deal' for the UK, is the 'full membership' one which it has had for the last 44 years and still will until end March 2019.

 

Those are the 2 opposed extremes of the outcomes spectrum in terms of Brexit deal, and simple common sense. If you don't get that, I'm not sure you're worth much to this debate .

 

Beyond that, the EU does not have to 'force' any 'Brexit deal' on the UK whatsoever: Article 50 does not require that any withdrawal agreement be agreed, only that one be discussed.

 

If the UK does not like a deal, any deal, it is not forced to sign on the dotted line (unless Parliament says it must - oh look, a sovereign and democratic decision ): it can perfectly well take its chances with the 'no deal' option. After all, as May said herself, no deal is better than a bad deal. In the end, it will be a political decision, not an economical one (since Brexit itself is not rational, from an economical point of view).

 

By the way, the EU is not going to save the UK from itself:

The British government is living in “fantasy land” if it believes that it can an amicable break-up with the EU in the event of a ‘basic’ Brexit, senior EU officials and diplomats have told The Telegraph.

 

Three separate EU sources in both Brussels and a leading EU capital have warned that British expectations of a “no deal, deal” had failed to understand the ramifications of the UK pulling out Europe without paying its bills.

 

The Brexit secretary told the Lords EU select committee that in the “very, very improbable” event that a deal proved beyond the two sides, worst-case scenarios would be averted.

 

“Whatever happens we will have a basic deal without the bits we really want,” he said.

 

However European officials are adamant that if the UK exits the EU without a deal – leaving an immediate €20bn black hole in the EU’s seven-year budget framework – there will be no appetite to engineer a soft landing for the UK.

 

“This is pure fantasy,” said a senior EU diplomat closely involved in the Brexit negotiations, “the idea of a ‘no deal deal’ completely fails to understand the EU, or the fury that would result if the British leave without paying their bills.

 

“At that point, the EU wouldn’t be looking to make a parachute for the UK, it will only be working out how to cut strings.”

 

A second Brussels-based source was equally clear. “If things go really sour the 27 will be in no mood to try to collate a number of last-minute mini emergency deals for ‘free’. We’ll be busy enough trying to sort out the budget fallout.”

From none other than the Torygraph.

 

The only 'forcing' that the EU is doing on the UK, is to make it face the standard (and fully predictable, and predicted) consequences of its own, sovereign decisions: the EU did not make the UK vote leave, did not make the UK government follow the vote, did not make the UK set its own 'no ECJ, no Customs Union' red lines, did not make the UK negotiate the way it has ('cake and eat it', no payment, no this, no that <...).

 

In relation to the no deal-no agreed payment scenario above, the situation is elementarily simple: if you don't pay what you owe, you get SFA from the EU out of this exit, you're 100% on your own, naked as the newborn in the global trading and regulatory context.

 

I'll gloss on the fact (factual fact) is that this abrupt crash-out scenario would stop all UK flights to the EU for 30 days minimum (because it's the minimum application timescale for relevant authorisations, for 3rd party countries).

 

The car crash has still only just started (it will accelerate and amplify fast from March 2018 ), so there's still time to mitigate much of its announced effects.

Edited November 5, 2017 by L00b

[Harrystottle]

All the talk is of money. Not much about democracy or accountability.

[L00b]

All the talk is of money. Not much about democracy or accountability.

On the topic of democracy, the EU is letting the UK exit without any interference in its democratic processes, and both the EU Parliament and each democratically-elected assembly that has a say across the EU28 -including the House of Commons- will have a vote on the withdrawal agreement (if there is one).

 

On the topic of accountability, unlike the UK government which is saying nothing even to Members of Parliament (and in the end had to file a motion of censure this week to get basic info most of us already know anyway - refer 'democracy' above, and talk about an own goal!), the EU has published every last bit of documentation and progress reports about the Brexit negotiations, on the dot. And please let's not get restarted about the EU accounts or due process within EU institutions (the arguments have been raised time and again, and torpedoed with linked evidence time and again - let's have that record changed already).

 

All the talk is not of money: all the talk is of still of-

 

(i) reciprocated personal rights (did you forget the UK citizens in the EU? Most Leavers seem to),

(ii) money owed, and

(iii) the NI border (still not even the first hint of a solution there),

 

because the UK is still stalling. Or floundering. Take you pick, same difference.

 

So what point are you making?

Edited November 5, 2017 by L00b

[andyofborg]

All the talk is of money. Not much about democracy or accountability.

 

democracy and accountability doesn't put food on the table and a roof over your head.

[Car Boot]

All the talk is of money. Not much about democracy or accountability.

 

That's quite right, Harrystottle. Those things are alien to the EU.

 

The EU is a greedy and incompetent political and economic union. But, unfortunately, It is not run for the benefit of the decent people living in its member states who are treated with contempt. No, it is run in the interests of multi-national companies and it's pampered, corrupt ruling elite.

 

The five EU Presidents (count them!) do not care for democracy or accountability. Their fig leaf Parliament pushes through whatever diktat the EU Commission (the real EU government) desires.

 

Love Europe. Hate the EU.

[Harrystottle]

All the talk is not of money: all the talk is of still of-

 

(i) reciprocated personal rights (did you forget the UK citizens in the EU? Most Leavers seem to),

(ii) money owed, and

(iii) the NI border (still not even the first hint of a solution there),

 

because the UK is still stalling. Or floundering. Take you pick, same difference.

 

So what point are you making?

 

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. Most of the talking on internet forums and the TV is occupied with the economic effects of Brexit.

No, I didn't forget reciprocated personal rights because I have always believed that EU citizens who are here would have the right to remain here. Most British people would support that 100%, I should think.

The NI border. Yes, good point. I reckon that they will try to enforce a hard border, but seeing as it is 200 miles + long, has hundreds of crossing points and in some places even the locals aren't too sure exactly where the border is, it's a fail.

Yes our politicians are floundering. Yes UK politicians are pretty crap (both sides).

 

The point I am trying to make is that when the EU removed democratically elected governments in Greece and Italy, very little was said in the UK. The BBC talked smoothly about "technocratic" government, whatever that may be, rather than national democracy being negated by the EU.

 

Overall my point is;- if people could be guaranteed economic well being, would they give up on democracy? Their right to vote, their right to free speech, free association? I think a lot would.

 

Not 100% on the subject of Brexit but as I say, the main focus on economics brought the thought to mind.

[Guest]

democracy and accountability doesn't put food on the table and a roof over your head.

 

Ultimately, yes it does.