Light At The End Of The Brexit Tunnel.....

[Zacs-Master]

Or just a train coming the other way?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/24/brexit-deal-free-movement-exemption-seven-years

[Old_Geezer]

Immigration would clearly not be permanently helped by a 7 year intermission; so why would folk being worried about immigration not vote to leave based on this thrown bone ?

You familiarise yourself with reality Zacs. At some point an offer is made, and if this is it, it is rejected. Inevitably there are negotiations, it would be naive to think otherwise.

The result is morally binding and there will be political consequences if someone sells out the nation.

[Old_Geezer]

But these points have been made umpteen times before. I'm unsure what is gained by covering ground that has already been settled.

[naomi24]

OG, They'd be stupid to be fooled by a mouldy carrot - and that's all this is.

[Zacs-Master]

OG, I really do think you need to familiarise yourself with the A50 process.

'For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it'

Here, have a read:
http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/the-mechanics-of-leaving-the-eu-explaining-article-50/

[jim360]

"The result is morally binding and there will be political consequences if someone sells out the nation."

I agree about both parts, really, although I suppose that leaves open the possibility of Theresa May (presumably) deciding that her political career is worth sacrificing instead of carrying out Brexit. This isn't meant to be clutching at straws (much) -- just an intriguing hypothetical future.

Quite a few leading figures in the Leave Campaign weren't all that bothered about immigration, so it's a bit early to assume that our negotiating position will even be to reduce immigration, let alone that we'll get that outcome.

[Gromit]

May has put Leave campaigners in key Brexit jobs in her Cabinet, so they get the flak when full Brexit doesn't happen.

[Old_Geezer]

"That's the figure bandied about by the Leave campaigners, I never checked it."

I checked it at fullfact whom I assume are correct. Folk can show me differnt if they wish. I take it that the figures are probably rounded but, £18B (American) is what we pay, minus any temporary discount (which obviously will be unlikely to be reoffered in any new deal; which is why it is a discount and was not simply removed from the demanded figure). Divide that by 52 gives around £350M a week.

It is unclear from the article whether that full figure would remain or whether it would be, as should be expected, smaller. Not that it matters as it's unacceptable anyway.

[Old_Geezer]

Do you not realise that, that is totally irrelevant Zacs ? Do you really believe a single contract will be offered on a take it or leave it basis ? That the 2 year limit (excluding extensions) is because it'll take 2 years to come up with the first meeting ? In which case why the facility to extend ? Or are you simply trolling ?

[Old_Geezer]

Brexit will either happen during this term or else UKIP will either be the major party next time, or at least hold so much of the balance of power that whoever has the larger party can no longer thwart their demands.

[mushroom25]

//or else UKIP will either be the major party next time..//

are you ignoring the might of comrade jeremy's "social movement" that is going to win the next election?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36876037

[Zacs-Master]

Saying that UKIP will hold the balance of power shows a profoundly naive view of British politics. Can you explain the mechanics of how this would come about?

Returning to 'negotiations', the EU is, as far as the UKs exit is concerned, divided. France and the Eurozone South bloc wanted us to have a speedy exit / the central and eastern countries (states) are carping themselves because of our role in NATO and our geographical position / the Northern countries are our closest allies but are now worried that our exit would destabilise the EU and Ireland has an awful lot to loose and is saying 'now now, calm down fellas'.

Not a great scenario for a negotiated exit is it. IF we are allowed around the table at all.

[Gromit]

Apologies,
Yes that should have been £350million a WEEK not per day.

The fee is worked out by how much trade we do. It includes our rebate (which we will probably lose) plus tax duty.

[Old_Geezer]

I'm surprised it needs an explanation but:

In this country parties tend to hold the major power in Westminster. In each constituency a number of candidates put themselves forward for election; major parties tend to contest all.

Usually a lot of the votes are split between the two parties who have been dominant in the recent past, some areas are more likely to elect one party, other areas another.

However if a major section of the public are disgusted regarding how their voice is been ignored many will either abstain, or more likely switch their vote to a candidate or party that has consistently shown they want what the public voted for and were denied; and even some of those who lost the referendum may well be swayed by considering the denial of democracy as a priority issue.

So, take a simple view of a marginal seat which changes from term to term. For the sake of argument, in that constituency, 50% of otherwise Labour voters are disillusioned and vote UKIP instead. 50% of otherwise Conservative voters are disillusioned and vote UKIP instead. UKIP keeps their vote and picks up from any other party who aren't fussed about the public being ignored, and it gets over twice the votes of the next nearest party, thus being elected.

This is then repeated fairly commonly throughout the UK with safe seats staying put but many others temporarily becoming UKIP. The UKIP party becomes the political force in Westminster that you think it naive to believe that they can be.

[-Talbot-]

Yep, one hundred twenty-seven billion seven hundred fifty million per anum was a bit of an exaggeration, Gromit

[gulliver1]

What on earth are you talking about!

[Gromit]

OG,

A few observations:

1. UKIP has a lot of supporters, but they are too dispersed.
2. Constituencies have an in built bias to favour the two big parties, by design.
3. UKIPs only policy is now fulfilled.
4. General Elections are won on the economy, immigration is low down the list.
5. Farage is UKIP. Without him they are nothing.
6. Protest voters are a small % of constituency turnout
7. Disgruntled Lab or Con voters will just not vote rather than defect to UKIP.
8. A party to take 50% of disaffected Lab and Con voters would have to be politically between those two, and UKIP aren't.
9. UKIP don't stand in all constituencies.
10. And are not as well financed as the other parties.

[-Talbot-]

gulliver1
What on earth are you talking about!



Don't let it worry you, clearly you don't have the skills to follow a thread, gulliver.

[TTG]

The Eu getting desperate now. We are in a great position.

[ToraToraTora]

why are we even talking to these charlatans, invoke, A50, stop the DD and wait. Sorted.

[Gromit]

TTT,
We are legally contracted to pay, and there are fines if we don't. Remember when Osborne said he wouldn't pay when the changed the way our GDP was calculated. He quitely paid up on the due date rather than incur a fine.