• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
I know. It's almost as if reaching a deal is less important to their future economic well-being than ours...

Well, given how many net contributor member states there are (the UK is the second biggest of four, I believe?!) versus how many net benefactors there are in the EU, it’s very, very important to the EU.

Don’t even get me started on the EU’s committed pension liabilities - snouts in the trough, utterly disgusting.

I’d like some hard nosed commercial negotiators dealing with it rather than the current pathetic government appointed stiffs...

I’ve seen highly complex commercial deals, with billions (yes, billions) at stake, thrashed out within a few days. I struggle to see how this is radically different.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Which is why I wish people would stop throwing phrases like "What all [insert side] voters were voting for" around.

Well that’s something we can agree on.

A grown up, highly commercial, approach to negotiations is what is required here.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
Did you actually watch that video? Because pretty much every comment from a Remain campaigner was along the lines of 'If we leave the single market, which is what the Leave campaign want'. None of them said 'We should leave the single market if we leave the EU'.

Except I never said that the remain campaigners said we should leave the single market. What I did say was that remain campaigners said leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market. Any time I may have said the word 'should' would've been a typo if anything. By the way, not every leave campaigner wanted to leave the single market either. In fact, many of them said that Britain would be remaining. This video (again from a possibly biased channel) proves that...


It's happened to me in the past.

How did it feel then? Did it feel rubbish like I thought it would? Surely every worker must get a choice in whether or not they want a promotion?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
How did it feel then? Did it feel rubbish like I thought it would? Surely every worker must get a choice in whether or not they want a promotion?
Not always. Sometimes a post comes up and you're the only qualified person for it.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
Not always. Sometimes a post comes up and you're the only qualified person for it.

I actually did think about that, but then wouldn't it be better to try from the outside to see if maybe someone else wanted it? Such as someone from another company? I'm not so knowledgeable on the working world you see, even at the age of 21.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Indeed, there are lots of people around with half a brain.
Would you believe there are people about who voted to remain, thinking the UK could change the EU from within! Naive isn't in it!

When I first read this comment I thought you were being ironic. Now I see you weren't.

Changing the EU from within? How did that go for David Cameron when he went to the EU to try and change things and was sent back with his tail between his legs in early 2016?!

A pathetic display that only affirmed my view (and sealed my leave vote).

The EU is an out of touch, arrogant institution which will never adapt, nor change for the better.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
When I first read this comment I thought you were being ironic. Now I see you weren't.

Changing the EU from within? How did that go for David Cameron when he went to the EU to try and change things and was sent back with his tail between his legs in early 2016?!

A pathetic display that only affirmed my view (and sealed my leave vote).

The EU is an out of touch, arrogant institution which will never adapt, nor change for the better.

Let's not forget though, Cameron was a remainer, so he didn't care a great deal. He probably felt an obligation to try and get a few reforms, so chances are he wouldn't try and get major ones, only little ones. If someone who was a staunch Eurosceptic was doing the negotiations, it might've turned out differently.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
I've crossed between the mainland and NI many times without any checks being made at all. The only thing they asked for was a name (not in any way verified) to go on the boarding pass (which was not in anyway inspected).

I would be the first to agree that something along those lines should continue - it's absolutely no big deal - other than to those who wish to make it into one.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
Except I never said that the remain campaigners said we should leave the single market. What I did say was that remain campaigners said leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market.
Yes, they said it in the context of 'because this is what Leave are saying will happen'.
How did it feel then? Did it feel rubbish like I thought it would? Surely every worker must get a choice in whether or not they want a promotion?
Not really. I didn't want it because I felt that I wasn't qualified to do it and didn't have enough experience to do it. As it happened, it turned out quite well. Not brilliant, but tolerable.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Let's not forget though, Cameron was a remainer, so he didn't care a great deal. He probably felt an obligation to try and get a few reforms, so chances are he wouldn't try and get major ones, only little ones. If someone who was a staunch Eurosceptic was doing the negotiations, it might've turned out differently.

Agreed.

Let's face it Cameron lacked a pair of balls and, frankly, we'd have been better off with Farage doing that negotiation - I'm no fan of his but at least he previously worked in a commercial role and isn't a career politician.

Unlike who we are left with now ?!
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
When I first read this comment I thought you were being ironic. Now I see you weren't.

Changing the EU from within? How did that go for David Cameron when he went to the EU to try and change things and was sent back with his tail between his legs in early 2016?!
The BBC seemed to think he did all right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
I won't quote the whole thing because it's really long, but here's some edited highlights:
Mr Cameron has secured a commitment to exempt Britain from "ever closer union" to be written into the treaties. He has also negotiated the inclusion of a "red-card" mechanism, a new power. If 55% of national parliaments agree, they could effectively block or veto a commission proposal.

He got the four-year "emergency brake" on in-work benefits he had set such store by - but new arrivals will have their tax credits phased in over four years. The brake will be in place for a maximum of seven years, rather than the 13 years Mr Cameron is thought to have wanted - but the EU has agreed it would be "justified" to trigger it without delay after the referendum if the UK votes to stay in the EU.

Mr Cameron won guarantees that countries outside the eurozone, such as Britain, will not be required to fund euro bailouts and will be reimbursed for central EU funds used to prop up the euro. The deal also provides a right for any member state to escalate concerns about the impact of eurozone decisions for urgent discussion in the European Council.

Mr Cameron got more than he was offered in the draft document, with the target to cut red tape.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
Yes, they said it in the context of 'because this is what Leave are saying will happen'.

It seems like they're only choosing to believe what they want from the leave side then. The £350 million per week was called out immediately, but then they're saying we'll leave the single market in the context of 'because that's what leave are saying'. Not a remain-exclusive issue, in fact you'll find many people pick and chose what's a lie and what's a truth.

Not really. I didn't want it because I felt that I wasn't qualified to do it and didn't have enough experience to do it. As it happened, it turned out quite well. Not brilliant, but tolerable.

I still wouldn't be too pleased about it. I don't know how it works, but I still find it outrageous for those who don't want to change jobs. That's just my opinion of course.

Let's face it Cameron lacked a pair of balls and, frankly, we'd have been better off with Farage doing that negotiation - I'm no fan of his but at least he previously worked in a commercial role and isn't a career politician

I don't trust Farage either. Having worked in the city, having gone to the fee-paying Dulwich College, and having even made money working in the European Parliament, frankly I don't know what he'd do. I'd say that if he wasn't a career politician, it's probably cause he's failed to get elected as an MP in the first place. I don't believe he really is a staunch leaver if I'm honest, but I won't pretend to know the man.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,582
Well the UK certainly can't change it from without.
Why on earth would we want to? The last thing the UK would want is competition on the world market from a reformed EU.

Fortunately, snowball's chances in hell comes to mind.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
It seems like they're only choosing to believe what they want from the leave side then. The £350 million per week was called out immediately, but then they're saying we'll leave the single market in the context of 'because that's what leave are saying'. Not a remain-exclusive issue, in fact you'll find many people pick and chose what's a lie and what's a truth.
They were saying it as a warning!
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
I would be the first to agree that something along those lines should continue - it's absolutely no big deal - other than to those who wish to make it into one.
I think it should continue as well, but it's difficult to see how it could. The image in @EM2's post above makes it clear why.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
The BBC seemed to think he did all right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
I won't quote the whole thing because it's really long, but here's some edited highlights:

With respect the below article suggests the BBC didn't believe anything of the sort.

My recollection of that negotiation was that he was sent back with his tail between his legs.

This is what affirmed my view that the EU is an intransigent dictatorship. And, frankly, one the U.K. would be best off out of!:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105

Some key areas also appear to be have been dropped along the way. There will be no repatriation of EU social and employment law, which was a 2010 manifesto commitment. There will be no changes to the working-hours directive.

The brake will be in place for a maximum of seven years, rather than the 13 years Mr Cameron is thought to have wanted - but the EU has agreed it would be "justified" to trigger it without delay after the referendum if the UK votes to stay in the EU.

But Mr Cameron ran into unexpectedly firm resistance from France on financial regulation. The French wanted to underline was that Britain would not win any "exceptions to the rules of the EU" - particularly in relation to regulation in the City - hence the addition of the "level playing field" line.

Mr Cameron got his explicit recognition that the EU has more than one currency - but it does not go as far mandating "multiple currencies".
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
I still wouldn't be too pleased about it. I don't know how it works, but I still find it outrageous for those who don't want to change jobs. That's just my opinion of course.
I wasn't pleased at the time. It was when I worked in retail, a manager was needed for another store, I was the only person a) even remotely close to being qualified and b) could get there easily because I drove. Either I did it, or the store would be closed.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
I think it should continue as well, but it's difficult to see how it could. The image in @EM2's post above makes it clear why.

I disagree. This is not a radical concept, if you look around the world, it’s simply the reality of international borders which exist, to a lesser or greater extent, in the vast majority of countries.

It’s not beyond the wit of man to simply make this work. I’d like some grown ups to take charge of the negotiations and thrash something out that works - no need for it to take months and years.

It’s no more or less complicated than that!
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Four gains, four losses. Break even.

No, because it was described to the U.K. electorate at the time as “David Cameron going to the EU to repatriate powers.”

In reality it was nothing of the sort, he repatriated absolutely nothing, despite the spin.

It was a pathetic charade!
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
I disagree. This is not a radical concept, if you look around the world, it’s simply the reality of international borders which exist, to a lesser or greater extent, in the vast majority of countries.
That's simply not the case. More countries have border checks than open borders.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
They were saying it as a warning!

A warning? They couldn't know though if we were to leave the single market though going by the argument that it wasn't on the ballot paper. On the other hand, it was so much a possibility that we would be leaving the single market by leaving the EU, therefore they shouldn't be surprised and trying to say there is no mandate to leave the single market. If there isn't a mandate to leave the single market, then there wouldn't be a need for a warning would there? Either way, they were picking and choosing of what they thought was truthful from the leave side anyway even if nothing we've said was right or made any sense.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
That's simply not the case. More countries have border checks than open borders.

27 v 1? I don't think so - divide it into net contributors and net benefactors. It rapidly becomes 4 v 23.

As I say, this needs to be a commercial negotiation, with a commercial solution. Germany and France have taken on their basket case with Greece, Spain and the single currency - fair enough.

I'd like a sensible, commercial, solution to Brexit proposed - failing that - I'm happy for us to crash out and fall back on WTO rules. I'm not sure many of us will be that worse off and sovereignty is worth a very high price to me.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
A warning? They couldn't know though if we were to leave the single market though going by the argument that it wasn't on the ballot paper. On the other hand, it was so much a possibility that we would be leaving the single market by leaving the EU, therefore they shouldn't be surprised and trying to say there is no mandate to leave the single market. If there isn't a mandate to leave the single market, then there wouldn't be a need for a warning would there? Either way, they were picking and choosing of what they thought was truthful from the leave side anyway even if nothing we've said was right or made any sense.
^^^
I can't make any sense of that, that's for sure.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
That's simply not the case. More countries have border checks than open borders.

Well I'm sure, at least I hope, we can negotiate a sensible border agreement that is virtually indistinguishable from the current arrangements.

This is not a difficult scenario for the majority of nation states around the world.
 

Up_Tilt_390

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
923
^^^
I can't make any sense of that, that's for sure.

If I'm honest with you mate, I'm not even sure I could at first. I'm just so genuinely confused at this point, because the remain side act like there's no mandate to leave the single market even though they felt the need to warn people that we would be because the leave campaign said we would, even though many leave campaigners didn't wish for it themselves, thinking they could get a Norway or Switzerland deal.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
I'm happy for us to crash out and fall back on WTO rules. I'm not sure many of us will be that worse off and sovereignty is worth a very high price to me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42199262
The leading authority on world trade has told the BBC that there are likely to be costs attached to a "hard Brexit".

Roberto Azevedo, director general of the World Trade Organisation, said that negotiations between the UK and the European Union would be difficult and "extremely unpredictable".

He said achieving a smooth exit and a new trade agreement by March 2019 was "ambitious".

Although he made it clear that a "no deal" departure from the EU would not be "the end of the world" as trade would continue, a free trade deal was preferable.

"Absolutely" he answered when I asked if a trade deal with the EU was better than relying on WTO rules on tariffs.

"I don't think this is going to be an easy negotiation, to be frank with you," he told me.

"I think it's going to be very tough because of the number of elements and variables involved in this conversation, trade negotiations are extremely complex, they are very sensitive politically."

Mr Azevedo is a significant voice in the Brexit debate as "no deal" would mean relying on the trade rules of the WTO, which he runs.

That would mean tariffs on many of the products the UK exports to the rest of the EU, and on EU imports into Britain.

Many would be low, at around two to three percent.

But some would be higher - on cars they would be 10% under present WTO rules and on many agricultural products they could be between 20% and 40%.

A House of Lords report suggested that a "no deal" would also mean Britain would not have an obligation to pay any "divorce bill", which could save billions of pounds.

"Whatever happens, this is not going to be a situation where all trade stops, and there is a collapse in terms of the economy as a whole - that for me would be the end of the world," Mr Azevedo said.

"But it's not going to be a walk in the park. It's not like nothing happened, there will be an impact. It will be a very bumpy road, and maybe long as well.

"Now, the question is how bumpy and how long - and that depends a lot on the terms of the agreement that will be reached between the UK and the EU, I have no way of knowing at this point in time.

"To the extent that the value chain, for example, the production chains, they're disrupted, or the conditions of supplying services, they are disrupted - the tendency is that prices will go up, of course.

"You have to absorb the cost of that disruption, and that in itself will mean it will be costlier to do business, potentially costlier to live, but it's how much - and it's impossible to predict that at this point in time.

The WTO is giving technical advice to both the UK and the rest of the EU as the Brexit negotiations enter a crucial phase.

Theresa May will meet the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, in Brussels on Monday and push for an agreement that enough progress has been made on negotiations to leave the EU that the discussion can now move on to future trading arrangements.

Although the sides appear to be closer on the terms of the Brexit financial settlement and on the rights of EU citizens in the UK and British people living in the rest of the EU, one sticking point could be Ireland.

The border between Northern Ireland and the Republic will be the only land border between Britain and the EU once the UK has left the union.

The Republic has signalled that it wants to limit "regulatory divergence" between it and Northern Ireland, meaning that the border can remain free of customs border posts.

But if the UK leaves the single market and the customs union as the government wants, then high levels of divergence are possible, if no comprehensive free trade deal is signed.

I asked Mr Azevedo if he knew of any examples where two countries were not part of a free trade agreement but nevertheless still had an open border.

"I can't think of a close parallel anywhere else," he said.

"It's challenging, I have to tell you, to the extent that there is no longer a customs union, no easy solution comes to mind.

"I think this will require creative thinking. It would require deep political commitment on the parties to find a solution."
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
Well I'm sure, at least I hope, we can negotiate a sensible border agreement that is virtually indistinguishable from the current arrangements.
That's the issue - what does 'the current arrangements' mean: the external EU border or the internal one?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top