Europe III: April F-EU-Ls

[QualityChimp]

Decisions like this should never be put to the general public - the whole point of having a representative democracy is for the MPs (who supposedly know what they're doing) to make decisions that are in the best interest of the country, then constituents, then party.

We're failing on all counts at the moment, especially on the best interests of the country part where politicians are scrambling for personal ambition above all else.

I agree. I think the Brexit vote should have lead to research into the options, rather than going blindly into it.

They seem to do what they want anyway.

Remember in 2013 when Cameron was defeated in Commons about wanting to bomb Syria?
""It is very clear tonight that, while the House has not passed a motion, it is clear to me that the British parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action. I get that and the government will act accordingly."

Then in 2015, they bombed them anyway?

[Neon Ignition]

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1063859818576916481&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fstorage.googleapis.com%2Fresetera-resources%2Ftwitter.min2.html%231063859818576916481

All sorts of EU related polling on this link, not sure how reliable they are but one poll suggests May's deal... bolstered Leave support. 51% in favour of Remain, 49% for Leave which I think is narrower than polls before the first referendum

[MartyG]

ComRes also gave Conservatives a 14 point lead in the last general election and Labour a 4 point lead currently, this is out of step with other polls.



It never ceases to amaze me that people don't understand sampling - so many replies in that thread that say things like "1,752 people asked their opinion, give it and somehow it can be used to 'evidence' the voting intentions of the UK Electorate?" - people are ignorant and stupid. With this sample size there's a margin of error of 2-3%. 2,000 people is more than enough to give a reasonable representation, so long as you understand the margin of error changes with sample size (more error smaller, less error larger). If you don't believe this is true, flip a coin once; your sample would suggest you'll get heads or tails 100% of the time. Keep flipping that coin and eventually the sample trend will show you it's 50:50.

The Spectator did an article on the withdrawal agreement document: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/1...s-brexit-deal/ - the magazine is very much pro leave (hence the tone of the article), but I'm not sure how you can read that and believe this arrangement benefits anyone - it's mostly correct factually.

[Neon Ignition]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/19/brexit-theresa-may-no-confidence-cbi-corbyn-would-welcome-option-of-extending-transition-for-up-to-two-years-clark-says-politics-live

Transitional Period could be extended up to December 2022

EU Foreign Ministers have ruled out any further talks or amendments to May's Deal

[Neon Ignition]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/19/brexit-theresa-may-no-confidence-cbi-corbyn-would-welcome-option-of-extending-transition-for-up-to-two-years-clark-says-politics-live?page=with:block-5bf272f2e4b0772932e22a43#liveblog-navigation

The Irish Prime Minister says if the Deal falls through his government still won't enforce a hard border.
This element makes me curious. If the UK and Ireland simply refused to set up and run an hard border what would happen?

[QualityChimp]

If the UK and Ireland simply refused to set up and run an hard border what would happen?

This:

->Open Spoiler<-

[Brad]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...log-navigation

The Irish Prime Minister says if the Deal falls through his government still won't enforce a hard border.
This element makes me curious. If the UK and Ireland simply refused to set up and run an hard border what would happen?

Presumably the EU would be forced to throw Ireland out. There are EU rules that people get away with breaking all the time but I suspect this is not one of them.

[Dogg Thang]

If the UK and Ireland simply refused to set up and run an hard border what would happen?

Well in the absence of any good reasons left to push Brexit through, May has taken us all the way back to the "immigration controls" in an attempt to maybe pull back in the xenophobes who kicked this whole thing off to begin with. The lack of a hard border in NI completely undermines that and is the exact opposite of immigration control, unless they slightly separate NI from the rest of the UK which was once proposed and could be workable but the DUP kicked up a stink about it.
[MENTION=9465]Brad[/MENTION] - the EU doesn't really want a hard border in NI.

[MartyG]

Yup, that speech to the CBI was aimed at the Kippers.

This is from the woman that brought us ...

[Neon Ignition]

@QC - I'd forgotten about that ad Creeped me out as a kid


It's hard work, like last week, hearing May waffle on about immigration and taking back our borders. Whilst I get what she's aiming for, it just comes across like she doesn't understand the conversation has moved on since 2016. She persistently answers nothing thinking border control is the answer for all. You know somewhere else that had pretty effective borders? New York when Snake Plissken was sent in, no-one wants to live there though

[Dogg Thang]

Yep. It just takes me back to early 80s national front nonsense. It's not where you want to take a country and it feels like it's all she has left to cling to. It reeks of desperation. But yeah, it also makes the lack of hard border in NI very tricky to navigate because it will be seen as going against the rhetoric she is spouting.

[MartyG]

It's not just that - it's completely ignorant on so many fronts, such as:

we signed a mutual agreement for free movement of people
there are already plenty of opportunities to limit immigration which the UK decided no to implement
we benefit from "jumping the queue" from the UK into the rest of Europe
immigration is of net benefit to the UK
blocking immigration purely on numbers ignores the complex needs the UK has with regards to skill/non-skilled work
it's stoking up resentment from those you're about to try and negotiate a trade deal with
it's stoking up the "immugrunts, burn them" mentality by suggesting that they're somehow taking advantage of the UK at our expense

I'm sure there are plenty of others and I'm fairly certain that there are going to be a lot of disappointed Kippers when they discover we don't actually limit immigration very much, even if we completely exit from the EU.

[Brad]

@Brad - the EU doesn't really want a hard border in NI.

Oh I know. No one wants that. But... if the EU turned a blind eye on this what message would that send?

[Dogg Thang]

I don't think it would turn a blind eye in that sense but I think it would support Ireland in basically making it legal not to have one in whatever way they can. But regardless of what they'd want, I can't see how the UK wouldn't be forced to erect and police a hard border unless a deal is reached.

[Brad]

Yeah this is the issue, and the reason no one can ever leave the EU without it being a bit of a nightmare. Plenty of EU countries have 2 or more borders; if they leave then you're looking at 2, 3 even 4 hard border crossings for goods transfer. FFS we should just cancel the whole thing. Everyone is choosing to ignore that we were lied to when coming out with the "it's the British people voted for" rhetoric. Take the people that lied, prosecute them for treason or whatever and do it again but have more than a binary option on the voting form. I feel like everyone involved should be charged with dereliction of duty, including those in the remain camp who CLEARLY failed to point out the lies being told and even lied themselves.