BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

surrey_commuter

briantrumpet wrote:

Here's one perspective from a non-British source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 99797.html

But I think it's underplaying the tensions within individual countries, especially France. The French are much more like the British then we might care to admit, but with a bit more of a penchant for direct action when things get contentious.

About 50 pages back we all agreed that the EU had given up on ever closer political union as a goal in itself and that it is only desirable in the pursuit of economic integration.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred

If it has, Juncker's intervention isn't helping anyone comprehend what it is. I'm quite expecting him to start quoting Jacques Delors.

The British public remember him well.

Bo Duke

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.

They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.

My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.

My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred

The French foreign ministry already said yesterday (within 24 hours of the result) the need for urgent EU reform to remain relevant to the wider EU electorate - very interesting and lets hope there can be informal discussions that might allow the government to make a proposal to the country. There's no doubt about it, the EU is equally affected as we are. Let's see what happens in the Spanish election today.

briantrumpet

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Here's one perspective from a non-British source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 99797.html

But I think it's underplaying the tensions within individual countries, especially France. The French are much more like the British then we might care to admit, but with a bit more of a penchant for direct action when things get contentious.

About 50 pages back we all agreed that the EU had given up on ever closer political union as a goal in itself and that it is only desirable in the pursuit of economic integration.

I'm not sure if you've read the linked article, but I would guess that Juncker still holds similar views to those of the article:

"A second benefit is that the British can now no longer block legislation when Europeans decide to join forces in areas where they are stronger together. The economic union must finally become reality so that national decisions can no longer jeopardize the common currency. The euro zone needs a unified economic government and a European finance minister commanding an independent budget.

The same applies to foreign and security policy. A permanent, shared headquarters is needed for increasingly important EU military missions in places like Mali and the Mediterranean -- something that all EU countries want, except for the British, who have blocked it. And when it comes to foreign policy, it is high time that majority decisions, which have long been customary on issues such as environmental policy, are allowed. In addition, the refugee crisis has shown that a real European border control force is needed, as well as uniform asylum law and a fair distribution of refugees."

That doesn't sound like "giving up on ever closer political union" to me. I know that article wasn't written by Juncker, but it demonstrates that there isn't consensus within Europe.

mrfpb

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... s-juncker/

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/n ... nd-Juncker

http://www.euractiv.com/section/future- ... europeans/

The first two links are the articles I posted about 50 pages back, as Surrey Commuter says, the third is an additional article on the Presidents debate. It is clear that Junker still wants the original Treaty of Rome dream of political and monetary union - the Superstate of Europe - this is reflected in the position of the foreign ministers of the "Original Six" yesterday . Tusk, from Poland, knows there is no appetite for the Superstate in Eastern Europe - and why would former Soviet states join another superstate where an unelected president can speak of them with the contempt that Junker (and to some extent Schulz) showed at that debate.

surrey_commuter

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Here's one perspective from a non-British source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 99797.html

But I think it's underplaying the tensions within individual countries, especially France. The French are much more like the British then we might care to admit, but with a bit more of a penchant for direct action when things get contentious.

About 50 pages back we all agreed that the EU had given up on ever closer political union as a goal in itself and that it is only desirable in the pursuit of economic integration.

I'm not sure if you've read the linked article, but I would guess that Juncker still holds similar views to those of the article:

"A second benefit is that the British can now no longer block legislation when Europeans decide to join forces in areas where they are stronger together. The economic union must finally become reality so that national decisions can no longer jeopardize the common currency. The euro zone needs a unified economic government and a European finance minister commanding an independent budget.

The same applies to foreign and security policy. A permanent, shared headquarters is needed for increasingly important EU military missions in places like Mali and the Mediterranean -- something that all EU countries want, except for the British, who have blocked it. And when it comes to foreign policy, it is high time that majority decisions, which have long been customary on issues such as environmental policy, are allowed. In addition, the refugee crisis has shown that a real European border control force is needed, as well as uniform asylum law and a fair distribution of refugees."

That doesn't sound like "giving up on ever closer political union" to me. I know that article wasn't written by Juncker, but it demonstrates that there isn't consensus within Europe.

You are right I did not read it. It is one persons opinion and you are then guessing that Juncker thinks the same.

The 2nd half of the article argues that a looser Union would be good.

rick_chasey

Come on leavers who bang on about not being racist. Step up to the plate and disown your fellow campaigners.

You all sit there saying 'oh how rude of you, calling me racist'. Well f*cking well do something about it rather than moaning how offended you are. Like it or not you were campaigning on the same side as the far right. This is the kind of sh!t leave has stirred up.

Now do the right thing.

surrey_commuter

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.

They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.

My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.

My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred

The French foreign ministry already said yesterday (within 24 hours of the result) the need for urgent EU reform to remain relevant to the wider EU electorate - very interesting and lets hope there can be informal discussions that might allow the government to make a proposal to the country. There's no doubt about it, the EU is equally affected as we are. Let's see what happens in the Spanish election today.

Come on chaps we need a higher level of debate/comment. Please give a source for "EU being equally affected as us" there is absolutely no suggestion that the EU will do anything to keep us. If anything they are cutting away the wreckage - I think people are not grasping the significance of our EU Commisioner resigning. It seems to have been the suggestion of the EU and surely points to them not even trying to find a deal.

mrfpb

Rick Chasey wrote:

Come on leavers who bang on about not being racist. Step up to the plate and disown your fellow campaigners. You all sit there saying 'oh how rude of you, calling me racist'. Well f*cking well do something about it rather than moaning how offended you are. Like it or not you were campaigning on the same side as the far right. This is the kind of sh!t leave has stirred up. Now do the right thing.

You're absolutely right, and I am wondering what I can do here. However I don't personally know anyone doing this stuff and I'm not getting anything like it on my own social media feeds. Laws on hate crime still apply, and anyone caught on camera or sending malicious tweets is reportable. Contacting employers of these people is also a good route - as cycling campaigners have found in the past.

joe2008

I do wonder if the question was too hard - a simple 'IN' or 'OUT' may have been better

coopster_the_1st

Rick Chasey wrote:

Come on leavers who bang on about not being racist. Step up to the plate and disown your fellow campaigners.

You all sit there saying 'oh how rude of you, calling me racist'. Well f*cking well do something about it rather than moaning how offended you are. Like it or not you were campaigning on the same side as the far right. This is the kind of sh!t leave has stirred up.

Now do the right thing.

Are you little minded enough to list names of posters on this site who you believe agree with the views that you have found?

I don't see anyone here supporting them so why are you implying it? Does that chip on your shoulder hurt from your view on this vote being in the minority?

If I saw this in my own circle I would stand up to it as I am sure anyone on these boards would no matter if they voted to remain or leave.

The one thing I am realising about you is that you are a f*cking disgrace to be a moderator of this forum when you are constantly lowering the tone with constant snide accusations. You should be setting the bar, not always lowering it!

rick_chasey

Ugh, you can't read.

I'm giving you the opportunity to go 'no i don't stand for this'.

:roll:

I gave up moderating my own views when my moderators powers were removed.

I like how you spend more time having a go at me making snide accusations when i give you the opportunity to say no, i don't stand for this.

coopster_the_1st

You are coming across as if you have 'angry little man syndrome'. You are an educated grown up so act like one and don't go all :roll: when you get pulled up on it.

Rick Chasey wrote:

I gave up moderating my own views when my moderators powers were removed.

After the way you have been posting recently I'm not surprised your moderating powers were removed :!:

Pross

Just a hypothetical question for people who know about the legalities of these things than me. Can parliament have a vote on invoking Article 50 with an amendment that suspend it until further negotiation takes place I.e. going into negotiations on the basis that we have a mandate to leave and will if we don't get more concessions? Or maybe vote against initially, try further negotiation and then take a second vote if they get nothing?

bendertherobot

Pross wrote:

Just a hypothetical question for people who know about the legalities of these things than me. Can parliament have a vote on invoking Article 50 with an amendment that suspend it until further negotiation takes place I.e. going into negotiations on the basis that we have a mandate to leave and will if we don't get more concessions? Or maybe vote against initially, try further negotiation and then take a second vote if they get nothing?

Parliament can do what the hell it wants. It's Sovereign. Lots of the legalities and difficulties are now coming up. Sturgeon is correct that Scotland has a veto. RT Davies in Wales (an outer) agrees. It's a little thing called legislative consent where the UK Government cannot legislate in areas devolved to the administrations without consent. Thing is that it's not been tested (properly) as a constitutional legal matter yet. Scotland and Wales (administrations) could withhold their consent and Parliament could ignore it. But, democratically (at least in Scotland) that's an issue.

Government lawyers will be providing a load of advice on whether legislation is required for much of what's needed or whether simple non legislative means are enough.

surrey_commuter

Pross wrote:

Just a hypothetical question for people who know about the legalities of these things than me. Can parliament have a vote on invoking Article 50 with an amendment that suspend it until further negotiation takes place I.e. going into negotiations on the basis that we have a mandate to leave and will if we don't get more concessions? Or maybe vote against initially, try further negotiation and then take a second vote if they get nothing?

The only negotiations are on the terms of leaving.

surrey_commuter

bendertherobot wrote:

Pross wrote:

Just a hypothetical question for people who know about the legalities of these things than me. Can parliament have a vote on invoking Article 50 with an amendment that suspend it until further negotiation takes place I.e. going into negotiations on the basis that we have a mandate to leave and will if we don't get more concessions? Or maybe vote against initially, try further negotiation and then take a second vote if they get nothing?

Parliament can do what the hell it wants. It's Sovereign. Lots of the legalities and difficulties are now coming up. Sturgeon is correct that Scotland has a veto. RT Davies in Wales (an outer) agrees. It's a little thing called legislative consent where the UK Government cannot legislate in areas devolved to the administrations without consent. Thing is that it's not been tested (properly) as a constitutional legal matter yet. Scotland and Wales (administrations) could withhold their consent and Parliament could ignore it. But, democratically (at least in Scotland) that's an issue.

Government lawyers will be providing a load of advice on whether legislation is required for much of what's needed or whether simple non legislative means are enough.

Intriguing - they will see Sturgeon as giving them an out but will feel they have to fight her. Can you instruct your lawyers to put on a good show but make sure they lose?

Stevo_666

bendertherobot wrote:

Pross wrote:

Just a hypothetical question for people who know about the legalities of these things than me. Can parliament have a vote on invoking Article 50 with an amendment that suspend it until further negotiation takes place I.e. going into negotiations on the basis that we have a mandate to leave and will if we don't get more concessions? Or maybe vote against initially, try further negotiation and then take a second vote if they get nothing?

Parliament can do what the hell it wants. It's Sovereign. Lots of the legalities and difficulties are now coming up. Sturgeon is correct that Scotland has a veto. RT Davies in Wales (an outer) agrees. It's a little thing called legislative consent where the UK Government cannot legislate in areas devolved to the administrations without consent. Thing is that it's not been tested (properly) as a constitutional legal matter yet. Scotland and Wales (administrations) could withhold their consent and Parliament could ignore it. But, democratically (at least in Scotland) that's an issue.

Government lawyers will be providing a load of advice on whether legislation is required for much of what's needed or whether simple non legislative means are enough.

I did wonder whether someone might find some legal/constitutional reason why this can't be done. If rhere is I'm sure it will come out soon.

bendertherobot

The issues aren't legal. Not yet. Just political.

ukiboy

Barely 3 days after Brexit and the temerity of some folk knows no bounds..
I was off to my local off licence in my little Englander corner of Hertfordshire to stock up on one of my favourite European beers - the delightful Budweiser Budvar- and I saw someone driving a Mercedes-Benz! Further up the road I spied a Citroen being driven!
Fancy! A German and a French automobile being driven on sovereign British roads!!
I was understandably horrified! Why hasn't Brexit addressed this??
Hashtag Concerned...

bramstoker

ukiboy wrote:

Barely 3 days after Brexit and the temerity of some folk knows no bounds..
I was off to my local off licence in my little Englander corner of Hertfordshire to stock up on one of my favourite European beers - the delightful Budweiser Budvar- and I saw someone driving a Mercedes-Benz! Further up the road I spied a Citroen being driven!
Fancy! A German and a French automobile being driven on sovereign British roads!!
I was understandably horrified! Why hasn't Brexit addressed this??
Hashtag Concerned...

Just goes to show how much the EU needs to export to us maybe ? And why it might not be the end of civilisation as we know it ?

Bo Duke

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.

They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.

My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.

My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred

The French foreign ministry already said yesterday (within 24 hours of the result) the need for urgent EU reform to remain relevant to the wider EU electorate - very interesting and lets hope there can be informal discussions that might allow the government to make a proposal to the country. There's no doubt about it, the EU is equally affected as we are. Let's see what happens in the Spanish election today.

Come on chaps we need a higher level of debate/comment. Please give a source for "EU being equally affected as us" there is absolutely no suggestion that the EU will do anything to keep us. If anything they are cutting away the wreckage - I think people are not grasping the significance of our EU Commisioner resigning. It seems to have been the suggestion of the EU and surely points to them not even trying to find a deal.

I would have thought it obvious, but I'll give two quick examples: a) the second largest contributor is saying that funding will no longer be available thus endangering numerous euro-wide projects, investments etc.. which will be a major trauma! 2) the liquidity and asset base of the ECB, 3) the unity of placing EU sanctions on Russia etc.. ie loss of political sanctity. its very 2 way.

ukiboy

It's for sure not the end of civilisation. The uncertainty and panic will pass and the benefits will come.
The Soviet Union broke up... 3 of the constituent states ended up as part of NATO and the EU.
East Germany and West Germany ceased to exist. They unified. With all the resultant complications and uncertainties..
In the light of the above occurrences Brexit is surely small fry?
Easily mitigated and coped with?

bendertherobot

It's a weird one, if Britain is truly great then we will prosper and brexit was huge.

If brexit turns out to be insignificant globally then we were tiny.

Bo Duke

ukiboy wrote:

Barely 3 days after Brexit and the temerity of some folk knows no bounds..
I was off to my local off licence in my little Englander corner of Hertfordshire to stock up on one of my favourite European beers - the delightful Budweiser Budvar- and I saw someone driving a Mercedes-Benz! Further up the road I spied a Citroen being driven!
Fancy! A German and a French automobile being driven on sovereign British roads!!
I was understandably horrified! Why hasn't Brexit addressed this??
Hashtag Concerned...

I had dinner tonight with 4 other couple, none of the English (except moi). (Americans and French largely). A good rattling discussion... the Americans feel if Trump gets into power we shouldn't be surprised to see the US make some significant decisions in the first 12 months, sensing the US people are equally fed up at the unwillingness of politicians to listen to the people. Also that whilst brave, they felt the UK vote was not unexpected as we are an island nation who have always had a greater degree of autonomy than mainland european states seem to need. Kinda makes you wonder if the US is also an island state and what would snap their chain....

Concerning the twitter posts on the previous page, you're always going to get an over reaction to a seismic event, however with a population of 65 million (51 when I was born...) are whilst vile, are actually well below a threshold to suggest anything other than an over excited reaction - if it happens beyond monday they'll find attitudes harden very quickly - as of course should be the case.

4kicks

ukiboy wrote:

It's for sure not the end of civilisation. The uncertainty and panic will pass and the benefits will come.
The Soviet Union broke up... 3 of the constituent states ended up as part of NATO and the EU.
East Germany and West Germany ceased to exist. They unified. With all the resultant complications and uncertainties..
In the light of the above occurrences Brexit is surely small fry?
Easily mitigated and coped with?

ON the global stage, yes, thats probably true, although one could argue the ramifications of the post Soviet power vacuum are still being felt in the middle east.

Apart from the UK Pound having its worst day since free-floating currencies were launched, and the stock market loosing 350 billion quid (ie 350 billion less for pensions), it is indeed small fry, ......right now.....
All of the doom and gloom mongers (in other words, Economists and Bankers who know what they are talking about) seem to have understated the procedural issues associated with Brexit: Companies, and hence markets, require stability. NO chance of that in the next few years. First thing that happens post Brexit is the EU and Brexit issue totally contradictory statements on the urgency of the timeline. Right now the UK has been left with no prime minister, in all probability no head of the opposition, and a likely general election as many MPS no longer have the mandate of their constituents, and, my personal suspicion, a splitting in half of the Tory party. NO clear roadmap, nor even agreement as to the legality of the Brexit mandate. Scotlands in play again, The "Leaders" of Brexit (as well as their promises of the famous 350 million) have gone walkabout, and it seems no-one is running the asylum.

Once that has been sorted, which is akin to un-picking one colour thread from a Turkish carpet to in order to weave a Churchillian smoking jacket, the new government then has to renegotiate trade terms with Europe (with the backdrop of expectation that the UK will be able to secure the same trade terms without any requirements of signing up to mobility of EU citizens). Then, trade negotiations with China, US with a partner who used to represent less than 2% of the GDP of the world (probably less now). The concept of "well, of course we can renegotiate our trade deals as an MFN" is, I'm afraid a litmus test to show how little those who say that understand how trade protectionism works.

And that's not even starting to discuss the fact that we've now got a significant tranche of the population with an "anti-Foreigner" sentiment probably not seen since Germany in 1930. But Cornwalls made it very clear they expect the rest of the UK to make up the funds lost from the EU, and Im sure the other areas receiving most funding, who on the whole were those who voted for exit, aren't slow to follow. But this is supposed to be a debate, so I have one question to those who voted Brexit from the South of England. Given the fact that the UK doesn't want Eastern European auxiliary nurses any more, who will be changing your colostomy bag, as it sure as heck wont be your grandkids who youve just F**cked out of a future.

surrey_commuter

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

The EU could chuck them a bone to justify Westminster ignoring the referendum but I think they are minded to tell us to fark off.

They have already reneged on invoking Article 50 so maybe they are hoping to play the long game and hope everybody calms down. Again I am not sure the EU will let this happen as the instability hinders them as well.

My reading is that there is a very interesting dynamic within the EU hierarchy too, exemplified by the different noises coming from Tusk (pragmatic) and Juncker (hardline). Juncker seemed to be trying to promote his view by intervening on the eve of the referendum by restating the 'ever closer union' line in such an antagonistic way, knowing it wouldn't be helpful to Remain, but hoping it would undermine pragmatism and compromise. Outside of the actual EU bubble, I suspect that individual governments wouldn't be unsympathetic to a refocus of the EU's ambitions. France would make our contortions look like a village fête if the genie were unleashed there.

My understanding is that the refocus has already occurred

The French foreign ministry already said yesterday (within 24 hours of the result) the need for urgent EU reform to remain relevant to the wider EU electorate - very interesting and lets hope there can be informal discussions that might allow the government to make a proposal to the country. There's no doubt about it, the EU is equally affected as we are. Let's see what happens in the Spanish election today.

Come on chaps we need a higher level of debate/comment. Please give a source for "EU being equally affected as us" there is absolutely no suggestion that the EU will do anything to keep us. If anything they are cutting away the wreckage - I think people are not grasping the significance of our EU Commisioner resigning. It seems to have been the suggestion of the EU and surely points to them not even trying to find a deal.

I would have thought it obvious, but I'll give two quick examples: a) the second largest contributor is saying that funding will no longer be available thus endangering numerous euro-wide projects, investments etc.. which will be a major trauma! 2) the liquidity and asset base of the ECB, 3) the unity of placing EU sanctions on Russia etc.. ie loss of political sanctity. its very 2 way.

Our net spend is approx 6% of total budget and they have 2 years to plan for it. More of a minor headache yah a trauma.
ECB - not the quickest stats to find but it seems we put in 13% - which is significant but very easy to deal with 2 years notice.
EU sanctions are led by the USA - as their poodle we will do as we are told. As an aside I know a little about this subject and the U.S. does the whole lot by threatening the banks

I still see no indication they will try and keep us and if they did surely Lord Hill would not have been pushed - why does nobody else see this move as significant?

ukiboy

Crickey!! A tad alarmist I think! Comparing 2016 Britain to 1930's Deutschland?!
It's hardly the Horst Wessel Lied song!

surrey_commuter

ukiboy wrote:

Crickey!! A tad alarmist I think! Comparing 2016 Britain to 1930's Deutschland?!
It's hardly the Horst Wessel Lied song!

Agreed - Germany had not recovered from traumatically losing a major war, had massive unemployment and rampant inflation. The establishment outsider, despite being a foreigner, blamed it on foreigners and seized power.

Uk - experiencing 70 years of peace since triumphally winning a major war, a period of worryingly low inflation and steady growth. The establishment insider despite being a foreigner, blamed our lack of even greater success on foreigners and may well seize power.

ukiboy

And yet the left wing seem to try and establish a link with post Brexit Britain (and the British citizens who voted to leave) and the far right of European history..

Our citizens have simply voted to leave a corrupt and bureaucratic institution, no more, no less...