Brexit Begins

Yes that's fair enough. But that's not what Remoaners are proposing.

If after we have exited people want to campaign to rejoin and a party seeking to rejoin wins a general election then having a rejoin referendum would be reasonable. Whether the EU would even want us back after all this and on what terms is another matter.

However die in the ditch Remoaners aren't seeking to have a rejoin Referendum after we have exited. They want a "do we really exit" one before we have even exited. That's not the same thing.

If Jeremy Corbyn wins an election he will become Prime Minister. It won't be a case of "are you sure, let's vote again first before that happens".

If Labour wins they become the government.
Since Brexit won we need to Brexit.

What happens after that is up to future elections but the last election results need to be honoured before the next one happens.

If Leave had campaigned on a hard Brexit, they would never have won the referendum. If they'd campaigned on some kind of stupid half-in, half-out quasi-Brexit, they'd never have won the referendum.

We're now looking at pretty much one of those or the other as only realistic outcomes, and neither of them has anything remotely resembling a democratic mandate. A second referendum would be perfectly justified given the circumstances, but we are out of time, plus what should the question even be?

The best thing we can do is come up with something EU that's going to limit the damage as much as possible, then see where we go from there whether it's negotiating something sensible with the EU or trying to decide if we want to rejoin on the grounds that Brexit is probably some product of some Russian divide and rule nonsense as well as being, you know, stupid.

Depends what you define as hard Brexit. Leave explicitly made clear we would leave the Single Market and Customs Union. The phrase hard Brexit wasn't used until afterwards that I recall.

Why can't Brexiteers stop telling lies. The new Brexiteer in charge claimed falsely that the no deal scenario is going to hurt the EU more.

Well you do have a massive trade surplus with us

So? The EU's trade with the UK is a comparatively small portion of its economy. In addition, it's much easier for an EU company to shift business to another EU state or to one of the EU's trade partners than it is for UK companies to shift business to distant countries with which the UK does not have any trade agreements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Well you do have a massive trade surplus with us

---

That doesn't make it any less of a lie.

It depends upon your definition of more. In percentage terms its probably wrong, in pounds/euros terms its probably right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

It depends upon your definition of more. In percentage terms its probably wrong, in pounds/euros terms its probably right.

---

Without an itemized list that statement is entirely void of meaning.

The newest howler from Brexitania; Brits will blame the EU if there is no deal. Like we care.

"World Trade Deal" :haha: My god, they get more Orwellian by the week.

I seriously wonder; is their entire political class made up out of semi-educated idiots or does it just seem that way?

Judging from the comments in even the normally moderate newspapers (I'm not talking about tabloids here), Mr. Hunt just about burned the rest of goodwill the UK had. I don't think the rest of the EU will see it differently.

Yeah, like anybody gives a flying fuck what they may think about the EU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Judging from the comments in even the normally moderate newspapers (I'm not talking about tabloids here), Mr. Hunt just about burned the rest of goodwill the UK had. I don't think the rest of the EU will see it differently.

---

So what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

So what?

---

Well, ask your Mr Hunt. He seems to think it matters.

Twitter Link

He then resumed banging his head against the wall. Good of him to speak up even though he's rich and retired. Rich Brexiters are of course scrambling to shift their own investments to the EU and applying for French citizenship :o

So, did I understand correctly that Raab went from having a sinecure went to having a non-sinecure?

Twitter Link


UK? Moar liek JUCHE amirite!!

Seriously though I thought the continuing headlines about stockpiling beans and drugs would constitute the upper limit on farcical Brexit developments.

Quote:

---

That sinking feeling, by Charles Stross
...
A Hard Brexit, on its own, would be a very dubious but probably long-term survivable scenario, with the UK economy taking a hit not much worse than the 10% downsizing Margaret Thatcher inflicted on it in 1979-80. But a hard Brexit, coinciding with the worst harvest failures in decades, ongoing climate destabilization, a fisheries collapse, and a global trade war being started by the Tangerine Shitgibbon in the White House is ... well, I'm not optimistic.
...

---

full article

Maybe it's time to go full prepper and build up a store of tinned food.

Well yeah but if you're seriously considering such contingencies it's probably also reasonable to start taking a closer look at other countries to move to, because hoarding and rationing beans isn't exactly a long-term solution.

I've become rather partial to Hong Kong style Tom Yum flavoured instant noodles. £1.46 for a pack of five from your local corner shop.

Enough to sustain you through decades of economic hardship and encroaching hunger during hard brexit fallout.

Top tip there Brits, take note. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Leave explicitly made clear we would leave the Single Market and Customs Union.

---

I think you're wrong.

They may have at times suggested it; but as a collective they were not consistently explicit. You may argue that it was the unofficial leave campaigns that said we could/should stay in the SM/CU, but official figures also did and I'm not aware of anyone in Vote Leave saying "Farage and Banks are wrong​ about this". But, correct me if I'm wrong?

Oooh, this is interesting.

Twitter Link

Direct Link: https://www.parliament.uk/documents/...-Committee.pdf

And look at the "Vote Leave 50 Million Ads" link.

The official Leave campaign, ladies and gentlemen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

I think you're wrong.

They may have at times suggested it; but as a collective they were not consistently explicit. You may argue that it was the unofficial leave campaigns that said we could/should stay in the SM/CU, but official figures also did and I'm not aware of anyone in Vote Leave saying "Farage and Banks are wrong​ about this". But, correct me if I'm wrong?

---

More importantly, they did not sell a No Deal Brexit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

I think you're wrong.

They may have at times suggested it; but as a collective they were not consistently explicit. You may argue that it was the unofficial leave campaigns that said we could/should stay in the SM/CU, but official figures also did and I'm not aware of anyone in Vote Leave saying "Farage and Banks are wrong​ about this". But, correct me if I'm wrong?

---

No they did explicitly say that. Both major Leave campaigns agreed on this and so did the government and the Remain campaign. It was the one thing everyone could agree on. No official figures said during the referendum campaign that we could/should stay in the SM/CU.

Some individuals (inc myself) not in official positions said they'd be OK with an EEA-style solution but the officials on all sides ruled it out. Also some individuals prior to the referendum campaign even being official let alone during it made remarks that either said we could/should stay or have been quoted out of context to imply they said we could/should stay but nobody did so at the time of the campaign.

The head officials on all sides couldn't have been clearer, see this less than a minute long video from the Daily Politics:

Indeed. The risks of that were left to the Government to try and highlight; as any responsible government should.

But apparently that was "Project Fear".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

More importantly, they did not sell a No Deal Brexit.

---

Of course not, that's a last resort. There's no reason for the EU not to agree a deal with us.

However if we're not prepared to risk no deal then its just a case of bending over and saying 'do what you want with us'. Not smart negotiations. Even if we crash out to no deal, it's not ideal but we'd look to build a new deal ultimately from the outside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Indeed. The risks of that were left to the Government to try and highlight; as any responsible government should.

But apparently that was "Project Fear".

---

Yes because leaving the Single Market wasn't a risk it was what we were voting on! That's like saying if someone decides to cross the road its risking crossing the road. No its risking getting hit by a car maybe but crossing the road was the intention. Getting hit by a car could be catastrophic, worse than any "Project Fear" it could be fatal, but that doesn't mean we spend our entire lives not crossing any roads. We simply make an educated decision to do so, to take on any risks and try to mitigate them where possible.

I don't think you realise that many leave campaigners also suggested that we could/should stay in the SM - and that a proportion of the public would have voted to leave on the understanding that this would have been a viable and attractive option.

Here's a different video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY

At the time, and from my own personal perspective, I certainly remember being told that a Norway type option would be a great thing for us.

That video is bullshit lies that has been completely taken apart though. Its a longer video again from the BBC this that demolishes it but please watch it to the end and tell me that you honestly stand by that video once you have?


Try and find a single official leave campaigner saying during the campaign that we should stay in the Single Market.