Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[AdrienIer]

To go with it though, the ship is the problem

Yeah let's all dive into the ocean and swim all the way, that's a good idea

 

[JohannaK]

And I am the one getting criticised for "talking In slogans".

Notice how my 'slogan' is not my argument, but an analogy that sums it up. The same cannot be said of you so far.

 

[Lohrenswald]

You imply EU is needed

I don't remember everything I have or haven't said, but I'm fairly confident I have made a case not worse than what the average user on this site does

 

[Arakhor]

Aiming for "not worse than average", eh? My GCSE history teacher would not be impressed with you, Lohrens.

In other news, after a recent dispute between Unilever and Tesco over the price of Marmite, allegedly due to the precipitous fall in the value, some bright spark produced this hilarious Venn diagram:

 

[Traitorfish]

You dont understand the Larger market EU will be the ones making the rules while the smaller market UK will have to give concessions. Just be realistic and plan accordingly

What do you mean the Empire isn't a thing any more? WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL US!?

 

[EnglishEdward]

Friendly Fire

Regarding

The United Kingdom made its first application to join in 1961. It was quickly apparent that there was a danger of political isolation within Western Europe, Commonwealth states were rushing to do deals with the new bloc, and it had American support. This application was vetoed by the French Government in 1963 with a second application vetoed by the French again in 1967. It was only in 1969 that the green light was given to negotiations for British membership. The United Kingdom joined the European Economic Community (as it then was) on 1 January 1973 with Denmark and Ireland. This proved controversial at the time. The Labour party initially sought renegotiation of membership. This was toned down to requiring a referendum on whether the United Kingdom should remain part of the Community. This referendum was duly held in 1975 with a 67% vote in favour of continued membership.

(1) The 1975 referendum was about continuing with EEC membership, not about being taken in or being taken in further by upgrading the membership.

(2) There are 40 years between 1975 and 2016.

(3) There are a lot of differences betwen the EEC then and the EU now.

(4) The 1975 referendum was more about accepting Harold Wilson's renegotiation rather than leaving.

(5) In 1975, it was clear that the costs of EEC membership, losing fishing zones and breaking trade arrangements with commonwealth countries had already occurred.
However the promised benefits, increased exports to the rest of the EEC had not. Many people took the view that we should not do an immediate u turn (it was only
two years after entry), but wait until the benefits of the common market for exporters came through. In practice the only areas of increased UK exports to the rest
of the EEC were in North Sea gas and oil because production was increasing, which being sold at world prices would have been obtained irrespective of membership.

(6) I was 19 then, and followed received wisdom from authority voted in favour of Harold Wilson's deal. The primary dissenters Tony Benn and Enoch Powell were misleadingly
painted as complete cranks. It has become clear to me over the last 40 years that while they were eccentrics, their analysis of the constitutional issues (best encapsulated
in FCO advice) was correct, and that the Prime Minister Edward Heath had knowingly lied to the UK public stating that entry to the EEC did not involve a loss of sovereignty, while
Harold Wilson ducked that issue and merely said that he had secured better terms. Incidentally Margaret Thatcher claimed credit for the UK rebate, obtained by concessions.

 

[Arakhor]

The Factortame fishing decision wasn't until 1989, but still, if (6) is true, we were deceived into going into Europe and then deceived into leaving again. Not that you're still complaining about it 40 years later of course.

 

[EnglishEdward]

As far as I can tell, what really doesn't inspire confidence is the continuous claims from
some about how the UK can get all they want, and give nothing in return, and refusing to listen to arguments for why that is impossible.

Quite. I know that feeling. The logic that the UK electorate voted to Leave the EU but not the single market is particularly dubious,
because that particular single market is the EU's internal customs union, and by default Leaving means not being part of that single market.

When the Brexit advocates keep on arguing as if they are in another reality than the rest of us, how can this process not end in a disaster?

Yes, the media reports and much of the parliamentary debates seems peculiar from Norfolk (England), let alone Norway.

There are to my mind four relevant troublesome sub-species of MPs here

(a) Most of the so called soft Brexit advocates are actually disguised Remainers trying to sabotage the process.

(b) Some MPs are clearly simply under the influence of the financial services companies who want passporting to continue.

(c) For other MPs, it is more of We are Parliament, how dare those voters think they can make decisions that overturn ours, that is our job.

(d) And those Brexit advocates thinking that they can wander about the world quickly doing good deals with China, USA etc are just fantasists.

It is quite refeshing to hear reports on the BBC of Donald Tusk saying that the alternative to 'hard Brexit' is 'no Brexit'.

 

[Takhisis]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/08/homophobic-attacks-double-after-brexit-vote

Victorian England is coming back apparently.

Is football coming home?

Wales and England and maybe Northern Ireland are screwed.

Businesses that were “vehemently” opposed to independence are now considering whether leaving the UK could provide greater certainty if Scotland could remain in the European Union, a Holyrood minister said.

I am with GoodSarmatian. It is defeatist to dismiss the EU as a neoliberal institution, simply because it cannot be more neoliberal than its members. It is the elected leaders of member states that rule and steer over the Union as a whole, the lack of accountability being due sinply to the fact that with 27 leaders blame is way easier to dilute. This does not mean that the project needs to be abandoned, but simply steered in another direction.

Would you abandon ship because it heads to Florida instead of New York or would you steer it to New York?

Are your parents in Florida or in New York?

The Factortame fishing decision wasn't until 1989, but still, if (6) is true, we were deceived into going into Europe and then deceived into leaving again. Not that you're still complaining about it 40 years later of course.

Hey, making false promises isn't deceit, it's politics.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The Factortame fishing decision wasn't until 1989, but still, if (6) is true, we were deceived into going into Europe and then deceived into leaving again. Not that you're still complaining about it 40 years later of course.

We knew back in 1972 that merging the larger productive UK fishing grounds with the rest of the EEC' s smaller and typically fished out fishing grounds would be disadvantageous
to UK fishing employment. The extent of Edward Heath' s deliberate deception only became clear when the FCO Legal advice was released after the 30 year rule had expired.

 

[Arakhor]

It is quite refeshing to hear reports on the BBC of Donald Tusk saying that the alternative to 'hard Brexit' is 'no Brexit'.

I really don't want to be uncharitable, but if you're now 60, you're approaching your retirement and won't need to worry too much about the massive impacts to our future economy which you've just written off as "refreshing". That comes across as insensitive, to say the least.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I really don't want to be uncharitable, but if you're now 60, you're approaching your retirement and won't need to worry too much about the massive impacts to our future economy which you've just written off as "refreshing". That comes across as insensitive, to say the least.

You are deliberately misquoting me again.

What is refreshing is that Donald Tusk is not encouraging time wasting with all the spurious talk
of soft exit e.g. stay in single market, that many Remoaners in Parliament pretend to seek.

 

[Arakhor]

I don't need to misquote you when you shoot your own credibility in the foot with every rendition of "Remoaner" and other silly phrases.

However, I am happy that I simply misinterpreted what you meant.

 

[Takhisis]

Erm, but the soft exit is not really much of an exit, except enabling English people to say ‘hey, no, we're not European!’.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I don't need to misquote you when you shoot your own credibility in the foot with every rendition of "Remoaner" and other silly phrases.

However, I am happy that I simply misinterpreted what you meant.

It is now over three months for the Remainers to have recovered from their surprise.

Some Remainers have recovered and acknowledge the outcome, others have not and are being obstructive.

The use of the term Remoaner distinguishes the latter group who are in denial.

 

[Traitorfish]

Some Remainers have recovered and acknowledge the outcome, others have not and are being obstructive.

Obstructing what, exactly, and how?

 

[Arakhor]

The use of the term Remoaner distinguishes the latter group who are in denial.

Well, given that all May will ever say is that "Brexit means Brexit", which tells us precisely nothing, it's hard to tell exactly what is supposed to happen. The electorate certainly wasn't asked to make a decision on what would happen (after saying "let's go", naturally) and Parliament hasn't been yet, so there's precious little to be in denial about.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Aiming for "not worse than average", eh? My GCSE history teacher would not be impressed with you, Lohrens.

I mean I'm not either but I sometimes feel like I get "unjustly treated" in this thread

F.ex. I'm pretty sure I've been wrong and unreasonable in other threads while recieving a lot less backlash

And to be brutally honest I took great offense to the whole "slogans" dismissal and I don't think I'll get over that any time soon

 

[Takhisis]

Oh, stop being melodramatic.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Had a quick look at fishing
The UK lost most of it fishing grounds because they were fishing in Icelandic waters which ended once Exclusive economic zones were expanded out to 300km off shore.
Current policies for Fishing are set by each sovereign nation, with quotas and restrictions. The UK has the second highest qouta for fishing in the EU currently

I dont know what is going to change by the UK Leaving the EU, I suppose you could increase qoutas within your own EEZ but that will only accelerate depletion.
The UK could get away with some increase but remember that the UK is the smaller trading partner, so any blowback from the EU is likely to hurt the UK more then the EU.

"[The EU is] Pinching our fish"

In 1976 the UK fleet was expelled from this area when fishing limits around Iceland were extended to 200 miles.

The UK’s share of the overall EU fishing catch grew between 2004 and 2014. In 2004 the UK had the fourth largest catch of any EU country at 652,000 tonnes, by 2014 this had grown to 752,000 tonnes and the second largest catch of any country in the EU.

The quota each member state receives is based largely on how much they fished in those areas in the 1970s, before the Common Fisheries Policy came into effect.

It’s also impossible to determine what the policy on fishing would be if we left the EU and things wouldn’t necessarily be any better.

Currently EU member states are allowed to place limits on who can fish in their territorial waters, and up to 100 nautical miles fishing is restricted to those who traditionally fished there

Elizabeth Truss, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, has said the waters around the UK make up 13% of the total waters of the EU. We asked Defra for the source for this figure and they told us that it was a widely accepted fact.


https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/