RugbyRebels

So the plan to enact article 50 in January 2017 is more likely to be late 2017. The reasons given are that German and French elections may interfere with negotiations and that the departments responsible for delivering are not properly constituted to do so.

Personally, I'd rather we got this right first time than rush into a total cluster. On the other hand, continued speculation isn't great for business.

The speculation is so damaging on the one hand I'd view further prevaricating as pathetic, and if those in power don't know what to do I'd suggest quit as you're somewhat in the wrong job. But it is hugely complex, and I'd still find it beyond shocking that people voted for this imbroglio, I don't have a better system than our democracy however and thus we have to live with that many racist idiots being allowed to vote.

Bit of an iffy stance to move forwards from, yes France and Germany are the big names, but unless France and Germany are going to go and corral votes for us (and it could easily suit them to leave us in a quagmire) we're basically announcing anyone with a veto has us over a barrel, and finding a gap in Europe with no elections that have a chance to derail our negotiations is a non starter.

Digby wrote:The speculation is so damaging on the one hand I'd view further prevaricating as pathetic, and if those in power don't know what to do I'd suggest quit as you're somewhat in the wrong job. But it is hugely complex, and I'd still find it beyond shocking that people voted for this imbroglio, I don't have a better system than our democracy however and thus we have to live with that many racist idiots being allowed to vote.

Bit of an iffy stance to move forwards from, yes France and Germany are the big names, but unless France and Germany are going to go and corral votes for us (and it could easily suit them to leave us in a quagmire) we're basically announcing anyone with a veto has us over a barrel, and finding a gap in Europe with no elections that have a chance to derail our negotiations is a non starter.

This. There's never going to be a good point to leave.

Incidentally the demographics suggest that by 2020 there will be a majority in favour of Remain. Roll on the 2nd ballot...

If we haven't triggered article 50 by 2020 then I can't see the value in a second ballot

The legitimate democratic will of the incredibly well informed British electorate must be adhered to. Whether the country gets ruined now or in 18 months makes little difference.

canta_brian wrote:The legitimate democratic will of the incredibly well informed British electorate must be adhered to. Whether the country gets ruined now or in 18 months makes little difference.

Could you let me know when you find one, please.

Which Tyler wrote:

canta_brian wrote:The legitimate democratic will of the incredibly well informed British electorate must be adhered to. Whether the country gets ruined now or in 18 months makes little difference.

Could you let me know when you find one, please.

I read two headlines in the sun. That must count surely. Oh and there was a picture of a bus.

canta_brian wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

canta_brian wrote:The legitimate democratic will of the incredibly well informed British electorate must be adhered to. Whether the country gets ruined now or in 18 months makes little difference.

Could you let me know when you find one, please.

I read two headlines in the sun. That must count surely. Oh and there was a picture of a bus.

The great thing about democratic will is that it cn be expressed again to a completely different conclusion without hint of embarrassment.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

canta_brian wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: Could you let me know when you find one, please.

I read two headlines in the sun. That must count surely. Oh and there was a picture of a bus.

The great thing about democratic will is that it cn be expressed again to a completely different conclusion without hint of embarrassment.

Maybe a document could be unearthed showing that it was never a vote to leave the Eu, but rather a sign up form for those volunteering to be culled for the benefit of the average IQ of the nation.

The arrogance and sense of superiority of the Bremainers shows no signs of abating. For the avoidance of doubt I voted to remain.

canta_brian wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

canta_brian wrote:The legitimate democratic will of the incredibly well informed British electorate must be adhered to. Whether the country gets ruined now or in 18 months makes little difference.

Could you let me know when you find one, please.

I read two headlines in the sun. That must count surely. Oh and there was a picture of a bus.

I was asking for any members of the British electorate who are / were "incredibly well informed" - we must protect endangered species - or at least, take selfies with them until they're all dead.

Which Tyler wrote:

canta_brian wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: Could you let me know when you find one, please.

I read two headlines in the sun. That must count surely. Oh and there was a picture of a bus.

I was asking for any members of the British electorate who are / were "incredibly well informed" - we must protect endangered species - or at least, take selfies with them until they're all dead.

Ok you got me. I didn't read the sun at all. I have however seen a bus.

Mellsblue wrote:The arrogance and sense of superiority of the Bremainers shows no signs of abating. For the avoidance of doubt I voted to remain.

Equally as hilarious is the INVOKE ARTICLE 50 NOW gang.

Len wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:The arrogance and sense of superiority of the Bremainers shows no signs of abating. For the avoidance of doubt I voted to remain.

Equally as hilarious is the INVOKE ARTICLE 50 NOW gang.

Agreed.

Len wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:The arrogance and sense of superiority of the Bremainers shows no signs of abating. For the avoidance of doubt I voted to remain.

Equally as hilarious is the INVOKE ARTICLE 50 NOW gang.

And in fairness they rank pari passu with those saying let's just take our time without realising what that does to business investment, and what the consequences of that are to the economy over the next 15-20 years say.

Digby wrote:

Len wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:The arrogance and sense of superiority of the Bremainers shows no signs of abating. For the avoidance of doubt I voted to remain.

Equally as hilarious is the INVOKE ARTICLE 50 NOW gang.

And in fairness they rank pari passu with those saying let's just take our time without realising what that does to business investment, and what the consequences of that are to the economy over the next 15-20 years say.

Get it all wrong and the consequences will last for generations let alone 15-20 years.

So how badly do you reckon this is going to get fucked up?

Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

Sandydragon wrote:Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

This is arrant nonsense. Which version of Brexit should they have prepared for? How exactly do you think it would look if the government had suddenly hired a shitload of trade negotiators at enormous expense before the vote? You really need to stop believing what the Mail tells you.

cashead wrote:So how badly do you reckon this is going to get fucked up?

It already is.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

cashead wrote:So how badly do you reckon this is going to get fucked up?

It already is.

Touché.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Len wrote:
Equally as hilarious is the INVOKE ARTICLE 50 NOW gang.

And in fairness they rank pari passu with those saying let's just take our time without realising what that does to business investment, and what the consequences of that are to the economy over the next 15-20 years say.

Get it all wrong and the consequences will last for generations let alone 15-20 years.

(a) they'd likely not get it all wrong, (b) waiting doesn't mean they'll get it right, (c) there are huge costs to last a long time as they sit on their hands so the consequences can come in either situation, (d) I have no issue with some phased announcements, (e) i've no issue with a number of sunset clauses being used with defaults being what we have in place now, (f) trade deals can and will be reviewed beyond what we do now, or whenever now comes to pass

There's also for all I don't like the vote and sit in contempt of just about everyone who voted to leave it is what was voted, and that should be respected and acted upon. I'm not a fan of the idea a government can received a public vote and say just say we'll get back to you on that, much like an election result a referendum result mayn't be what's wanted but you've simply got to take it and move on/out. It's poor form in a democracy not to act on the vote no matter it mayn't be as you want.

Sandydragon wrote:Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

Theoretically possible, but it definitely makes things extremely difficult, since now the UK has a high possibility of tariffs imposed on them by 8 of their top 10 trading partners, who are part of a massive trading bloc that makes up the single largest chunk of UK's foreign trade, who have basically flatly rejected any moves prior to Article 50 negotiations by the UK to sound out a possibility to be a non-member trading partner like Norway, who still have EU laws imposed upon them anyway, with no say in how said they are shaped - not to mention having to pay a membership fee.
Yeah, they've made it work and they're doing OK for themselves (for now, based on their oil and fishery industries), but it doesn't change the fact that they're still in a less advantageous position when trading with the EU. That's not to mention that the EU leadership has basically told them to get on with it already, and appear to be in an example-making mood, and have outright stated that the migration rules will remain as long as the UK wants to trade with the EU - which makes a mockery of the particularly xenophobic comments made by Brexiters doesn't it?

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

This is arrant nonsense. Which version of Brexit should they have prepared for? How exactly do you think it would look if the government had suddenly hired a shitload of trade negotiators at enormous expense before the vote? You really need to stop believing what the Mail tells you.

cashead wrote:So how badly do you reckon this is going to get fucked up?

It already is.

Strangely, I don't read the mail.

Are you suggesting that the government should have basically not bothered with any prior planning on how to implement Brexit? That is arrant nonsense. At the best least, establish a department to take the issue forward and determine how to staff it. The details of Brexit can be worked out later.

cashead wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

Theoretically possible, but it definitely makes things extremely difficult, since now the UK has a high possibility of tariffs imposed on them by 8 of their top 10 trading partners, who are part of a massive trading bloc that makes up the single largest chunk of UK's foreign trade, who have basically flatly rejected any moves prior to Article 50 negotiations by the UK to sound out a possibility to be a non-member trading partner like Norway, who still have EU laws imposed upon them anyway, with no say in how said they are shaped - not to mention having to pay a membership fee.
Yeah, they've made it work and they're doing OK for themselves (for now, based on their oil and fishery industries), but it doesn't change the fact that they're still in a less advantageous position when trading with the EU. That's not to mention that the EU leadership has basically told them to get on with it already, and appear to be in an example-making mood, and have outright stated that the migration rules will remain as long as the UK wants to trade with the EU - which makes a mockery of the particularly xenophobic comments made by Brexiters doesn't it?

We'll only have free movement imposed if we stay part of the single market. 10% tariffs and the flight of our manufacturing industry appears to be the price of our xenophobia. Fucking brilliant. That's leaving aside the entirely porous border with the EU.

Iirc the Treasury estimated the loss of GDP of the WTO option as 6%. It is possible that in world terms we'll be successful outside the GDP, but it's pretty much beyond argument that we'll be less successful.

Sandydragon wrote:Monumentally. I voted to remain, but I was badly torn as I have little love for the eu. I do think that we can be successful outside of the eu, but the lack of planning is a total disgrace. Cameron seems to have thought that the remain vote winning was a certainty. It is frankly irresponsible government not to plan for the what ifs. The longer we wait citing lack of skilled people and so forth the more incompetent we look.

I'm a bit split on the EU, there's a lot I like and admire about it, there are some annoying aspects of overreach, and there's some worse than annying aspects, but I'd have chosen to stay and seek reform. On the lack of action from the government I'd broadly say there should have been a lot more work done by the vote leave camp to set out what would be done and when, and what the actual aims of a leave vote were, as was they were able to suggest to the myriad leave positions they'd all get what they wanted which is palpably a nonsense and possibly a dangerous one. However with nothing but an ill defined pipe dream people did vote to leave and it is now clear the government has been caught on the hop, whether anyone can make hem pay for that at the next election is somewhat debatable, worryingly so even, but it's far from adequate let alone impressive.