The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50

MrsGrey

I don't agree that people that tend to seek power are generally vain and naturally egotistical,

While I can indeed look at some World leaders and tell me they are not vain and egotistical. I can look at others see the opposite.

For me, there are too many generalisations underpinning your argument for me to go along with it.

Having said that, I'm not saying democracy (ie everyone gets a vote, and we elect and empower an executive to get on and do stuff that needs to be done at a centralised level) doesn't have its failings.

I'd like to see the current system amended in its details.

But I can't really see any alternative that convinces me it would be more effective, in a global world.

Unless you want to put me in charge. ;biggrin

PrestonHammer

I was talking about the whole world in general. I mean Live Aid was in the eighties and yet still there are people starving. The world produces double the amount of food that it needs but people around the world are still starving. Why can't that be sorted out? Why are we still having wars? There were two massive ones in the last century, you would think humans would have had enough of them by now but no, they still keep happening.

chicagohammer

I have yet to be convinced that there was no room to maneuver over immigration and staying within the EU,

Trump has been banging on about his beautiful wall that will allow him to control immigration and yet in the U.K. We already have a wall, it is at least 22miles across and I have yet to meet anyone whose feet can touch the bottom.

If we really wanted to make control of our borders a top priority, then surely we could do so and I really do not see what the continental Europeans could frankly do about it.

I do believe that the major EU partners did not want to see us leave the trading block and whilst I think that immigration was a major factor driving the vote in favor of leaving, I remain unconvinced that it needed to be.

Just my tuppence worth

claretandbluesky

I very much agree Chicago as I feel there is a big space to solve the UK's need for immigration control and keep us in, which would actually serve all. A simple one is that we increase our contribution or reduce rebate in return for some control due to our infrastructure being unable to cope, agree it for five years and see where we are then. In theory this was what Cameron tried to do in his pre referendum negotiations, however as the EU did not really feel we would ever vote to leave they didn't really give meaningful ground.

Unfortunately it has become political now and that is where the problem is found. The EU cannot be seen to allow us to cherry pick and gain through our referendum result as all would follow us in doing so, whilst the Govt are afraid that the brexiters will burn the country if not allowed there victory however pyrrhic. In my view this is the problem, how to solve the political conundrum, I would have preferred May to approach that way rather than brexit means brexit. It may still happen but only once she has surrendered her leverage by triggering article 50. I may happen through leaving in that we pay a lump for market access and only lose our veto's opt outs and voice, only.

Yeoldhammer

sorry C&B that would never happen, I don't think we could chuck enough money for any deal on immigration it would be instantly be vetoed by eastern European countries.

Dodger58

On the Nation State part of the discussion and National Identity, there is a Reith Lecture coming up next week (I think) referred to here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/18/racial-identity-is-a-biological-nonsense-says-reith-lecturer and will be available by mid next week here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07zz5mf.

I am interested in listening and suspect others may be too - whether we agree on the content and any assumptions/outcomes or not is irrelevant ;wink

OutcastLondoner

Interesting discussion on agricultural sector and Brexit on this podcast. https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/weekly-economics-podcast/id970353148?mt=2&i=375477629

TheMadcapLaughs

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-patriotism-a-menace-to-liberty

This is an interesting article on nationalism/patriotism. And As Preston says above, we do seem to be repeating the same mistakes. And Dodger, thanks for the link above, should be interesting.

It`s funny, but I am in no way patriotic as such, but am strangely "proud" to be English/British, perhaps proud is the wrong word, but I like/love living in Britain and generally like/love the British sense of humour.

ASLEFshrugged

There are plenty of good things about England and being English just as there are plenty of bad things but I didn't choose to be English so I can't really understand why nationality means so much to some people.

I certainly don't consider being English is in any way better than being German or French, Brazilian or Japanese, its just the place you happened to be born.

NEoldiron

In Germany at the moment and almost embarrassed to say I'm English.
Just watching TV and saw that Wallonia (the French speaking part of Belgium) has blocked the EU trade deal with Canada. Let that sink in when you Brexiteers think trade negotiations will be a walk in the park. Not a country but a part of one has said NON!
And, please, you dreamers get in the world as it actually is not as we would all like it to be.
As someone on here said, it's the economy that determines a country's future-if the first tanks so does the second.

claretandbluesky

I almost feel sorry for Theresa May as she has such a problem and no way out. I say almost because she is making it worse for herself by acting like a brexiter and using language as if the country sent a unanimous vote, when in fact it was about as close as you could get. I think since her shamelessly playing the home crowd at the tory conference the tide has begun to turn and she will soon be unable to address the hole in the ship and that it is starting to sink. She will either have to move to reassure and commit to a 'soft' even hardly any brexit or find a way off the hook with another vote.

The problem is a political one in how does she politically avoid doing something that no one would contemplate strategically were it not for that referendum. How do you politically get around the referendum result?

Her best chance is if the country tanks and it becomes so ridiculously obvious it's not a good idea, or less likely the EU offer an alternative. Will that happen before March? Mark Hill the GB representative who resigned his role the day after Brexit said today that many in the EU don't think it will happen, I personally think that is because they cannot believe a country in our position would ever do that to itself.

I think she knows she would lose a vote in the commons, the house of lords and even through referendum now, it was a case of one moment in time and now what? not one Brexit politician has come up with a coherent strategy that leads to a better position than before, and all there hopes rely on other people allowing us things.

Politicians like Cameron need learn politics is not a game, and the nation should come before party politics.

Colchester_Iron

I'm not sure I could be more proud of being English/British.

If that makes me strange then so be it.

;scarveng

Up the Hammers!

ironmike44

So NE - you appear to be saying that the fact that a region of the country which is 24th largest by GDP can block a deal with the 10th largest country by GDP and impacts on countries who are 3/5/6/14th largest by GDP is a good thing, and proves that the country that is 5th largest by GDP should rethink its desire to leave the club where this can occur?

MrsGrey

I have been reading about this Chinese steel thing.

This is a genuine request for info/background as it is not a topic I have followed very closely.

So far, as I understand it, China is able to export really really cheap steel to the EU as a result of its govt basically giving subsidies to their steel producers which enable them to sell (effectively) at a loss.

This is making it very difficult for EU steel producers to compete, with the result that companies (including British companies) are losing contracts, or having to accept much lower prices, and so cut staff, cut wages.. even go out of business etc.

That sounds bad.

So the EU has been discussing a change to its tariff rules to try to impose higher tariffs on Chinese steel, which will limit 'dumping' and be good for British steel producers.

But the UK government (under Cameron and now May) are blocking these changes.

What is the rationale?

ironmike44

Mrs Grey - my take on this - for what it's worth - this is just another example of individual states within the EU using their power of veto for wider economic and political purposes. The UK and Chinese governments are heavily engaged in deals which rely on Chinese funding. Hinckley Point being the most publicised (but there are plenty of others). It seems unlikely that the UK would jeopodise these deals to support the 'UK steel industry' which is now relatively small in global terms and is mostly owned by foreign corporations.

Promised myself I would stay out of this but - my view is that the EU will fail because the interests of individual states will always overide the the will of the EU and those individual states have the power of veto. Unless and until the individual states are prepared to become a truly single federal entity ruled by a single government this will just continue and the EU will become unmanageable.

I spent many years working in Hungary and Romania - I'm convinced that these countries will always put the interests of their state first and will not willingly subjugate themselves to rule from Brussels (or Berlin) - why would they, they have been there before, and they have long memories.

NEoldiron

Ironmike, I was pointing out that even a (poorer) part of a EU country can kibosh a deal years in the making. Doesn't bode well for our negotiating position. ;whistle

TheMadcapLaughs

Correct me if I`m wrong NE, but I think the gist of what you are saying is that a complicated trade deal that has taken SEVEN YEARS (nothing should take seven years, unless of course you need to justify your existence) between the EU and Canada has been scuppered by a tiny principality in Belgium and that`s a GOOD reason to remain within the EU. I am genuinely confused.

TheMadcapLaughs

Sorry, just seen that Ironmike has pretty much posted the same. ;ok

NEoldiron

From the Economist's article today regarding the blocked deal, EU Trade commisioner, Cecilia Malmstrom says “if we can’t make (a deal) with Canada, I’m not sure we can make (one) with the UK.”

TheMadcapLaughs

When the economy tanks the gap between rich and poor gets wider, when the economy is "doing well" the gap between the rich and poor gets wider. Perhaps we should address what the economy achieves, what its end goals are rather than classing success and failure on narrow empirical lines. And if it wasn`t for "dreamers" you know, people like Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King...........
And if you are looking for real World solutions, to real World problems here and now check out Abdullah Ocalan and what is happening in a place called Rojava. And if you want to know what can be achieved by local people, google Cheran, Mexico. Just because the World is "as it is" now, in this moment in time doesn`t make it right and doesn`t mean it`s how it will always be. I don`t think the EU as an all encompassing super power is the right way or the most efficient way to go about things, and perhaps a seven year negotiation that needs to accommodate and satisfy the requirements of such a diverse populous, only to fail at the very last proves the point.

TheMadcapLaughs

Blimey, if Cecilia says that the failure of the EU to conclude a deal with Canada puts in doubt the EU`s ability to conclude a deal with the UK then I may have to re-evaluate my entire stance on this issue. Or perhaps, maybe, Cecilia isn`t very good at negotiating, or perhaps she has come to the conclusion that X doesn`t agree with Y so by default X will necessarily disagree with Z. It`s a meaningless statement.

NEoldiron

Madcap, keep on dreaming

TheMadcapLaughs

"It is often said that Anarchists live in a World of dreams to come, and do not see the things that happen today. We do see them only too well, and in their true colours, and that is what makes us carry the hatchet into the forest of prejudice that besets us."

Just something I came up with on the spur of the moment.............. ;whistle

Tomw85

NE it is because it is so hard to agree trade deals with the EU that I think we would be better off out. We can then agree our own trade deals across the world without some small part of Belgium blocking it at the last minute.

If the EU is making so hard to do business with it then that is hardly an outwardly thinking state looking to progress and promote free trade across the world, but more a protection racket for the very rich.

AdMeus_CaputFilius

TheMadcaplaughs said: The further away decisions are made that affect peoples day to day lives the more alienated, the more disconnected, the less in control people feel.

Exactly. This is what the leaders of the SNP try to enforce and is the root of all rebellions (French, Russian etc. local peoples felt those in power ignored them, which they probably did TBH), unfortunately it also works against the SNP's independence crusade as it the Scottish person in the street feels a disconnect to Westminster, it will be even a bigger one with the EU parliament and commissions no matter how rosy Nicola Sturgeon and here cohorts try to paint it.

And it is a key reason why the leave vote won, did not matter what the personal concern was - people felt no one was listening or would do anything. On the immigration question, I think because it was already an issue, there was a concern that the EU would force more to be take by the UK (no matter what they said) and the UK would have no say in it.

AdMeus_CaputFilius

NEoldiron said:

In Germany at the moment and almost embarrassed to say I'm English.
Just watching TV and saw that Wallonia (the French speaking part of Belgium) has blocked the EU trade deal with Canada. Let that sink in when you Brexiteers think trade negotiations will be a walk in the park. Not a country but a part of one has said NON!
And, please, you dreamers get in the world as it actually is not as we would all like it to be.
As someone on here said, it's the economy that determines a country's future-if the first tanks so does the second.

Did you actually read why and what Ceta actually is? And the reason it is being blocked is not they don't want or agree with it, it is regarding assurances which the leader of the region said he is happy with already, so it is not a major issue and despite what is being said, it is expected to be signed in the next week or so.

Ceta gives Canada and the EU free trade on 98% of exports/imports and the concern was to do with lost tax revenues - this is not an issue for UK/EU as there aren't any. Granted it does not cover all the same trading areas that UK/EU have but as it does not include free movement of people etc. (think about that for a second - 98% free trade and no free movement of peoples etc.). Also we already trade goods to EU legislation requirements so where that is an extra cost to Canada, it will not be to us. I think Ceta should be something we should be looking at rather than the Swiss/Norway etc. agreements. ;ok

Oh and if you are embarrassed maybe you should look at taking out alternative EU citizenship, there is nothing wrong in being embarrassed about some of the antics your fellow countrymen get up to, it's what sets you apart from them and shows you recognise there are differences between you.

NEoldiron

It seems that you who responded to my post regarding Wallonia have failed to recognise the point I was trying to make or deliberately ignored it, and instead inferred something that wasn't there.
The point being that negotiations with the EU are not going to be as easy as the Brexiteers have tried to convince us but extremely difficult.
And another point Onme'eadson, if you care to re-read my post, I said almost embarrassed.

AdMeus_CaputFilius

NE - sorry for misunderstanding your post re; embarrassed.

I did not miss your point, only pointing out that there is every chance it will be resolved very soon from the positive comments by the leader of the Wallonians, also the specific issue was about lost duty which is an issue that will not apply to the UK/EU negotiations.

Who said it was going to be easy? We all know how long these things take with the EU, it is down to them and our team to lay out the grounds and move it along as swiftly and smoothly as possible - it could be a lot easier and smoother than is being talked up by all those (on both sides and in the media) who keep raising it as 'Hard Brexit', but then that does not make such sensationalist headlines (see below).

The main problems will be with the EU in my opinion not the UK, as there are many more 'self-interest groups' (and I include Gov'ts and national EU businesses in that) who want to get their hands on and control some of those markets and areas that are run out of the UK. This will also be complicated by negotiations going on with the EU parliamentary/commissions representatives and others with representatives of the member states (even though there is only supposed to be one EU team representing them all) - i.e. France/Germany/whoever raise an issue specific to them which sparks a separate negotiation outside of the main one.

There is a report on the BBC (poorly report on as the heading is deliberately misleading): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37743700

The head of the BBA does not actually say that (the headline) what he is saying is they have/are making plans in case they have to, and in fact as you read it he is actually being critical of both the UK and EU 'Hardliners' who would be happy to cut off their noses to spite their faces just to get their own way, which would be very damaging to both the UK and the EU.

These are the people (more moderate voices) we and both the UK and EU leaders should be listening to, you only have to look at the current rhetoric within the UK member countries, particularly from the Scottish element. That will be ten fold for the EU.

SuzanneClaret

NEoldiron

Onme'ead, apology accepted ;ok

Regarding the link you posted, you omitted the little bit about the potential loss of tax revenue from banking:

"Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesperson Tom Brake said that if the UK pursued a "hard Brexit" then it would "threaten the £65bn the UK financial services industry pays in taxes each year".
He added: "The Conservative government must explain how it will make up this funding shortfall if the UK leaves the single market.""

So much for £320million a week for the NHS (yes I know that's been debunked weeks ago, but how many Brexit voters were influenced by that)

And from another perspective of what the EU means:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37720199