1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Brexit Discussion

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by FrenchTart, Sep 11, 2016.

  1. Cern

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 3, 2008

    Posts: 3,131

    Location: London

    The only way the Euro would be "forced" on the UK is if we leave and then re-apply to join at a later date, at which point it will become a term of joining just like any other applicant. So if this is a concern, it's better off to stay with our current membership terms which are not on any kind of tram lines towards the Euro. If it did happen, I wouldn't have a problem if it was of economic benefit to the UK and considered financially safe by economists. On a practical level it's just a currency after all, money is money.

    Our membership fees were £9.4 billion net in 2017, which amounts to about £143 a head. Not exactly "exorbitant" given the benefits we get in return. I'm guessing you already feel this is too much, but at what point does it truly become "exorbitant"? I would say when the costs outweigh the benefits by a significant margin. But currently the benefits outweigh the costs by a very significant margin.

    European Army is an emotive term. What are we talking about here? Peace keeping force? A replacement for NATO? An aggressive force to counter threats from Russia etc? Voluntary? Conscription? You'd have to define what you mean here before you could expect a reasoned response.
     
  2. norm

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 21, 2003

    Posts: 4,826

    I'm not singling out any one issue in particular, I'm just curious in the eyes of a remainer when enough would be considered enough. Surely if you believe whole heartedly in the founding principles of the EU and role of democracy contained within you wouldn't have reason to doubt or waiver from it?
     
  3. garnett

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 25, 2008

    Posts: 3,814

    This is tired rubbish that was wrong the first time the demagogues fed it out, and which has been debunked every time it's been mindlessly parroted since.

    Brexiteer MPs voted down Brexit, so take up your complaint with them. However hard they try and shirk responsibility for their shambles, the fact that Brexiteers can't decide amongst themselves what it is they want is nobody's fault but theirs.
     
  4. a1ex2001

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 14, 2005

    Posts: 11,123

    Location: Here and There...

    The EU can’t force the Euro on us we have a veto (which we would loose if we leave and come back) if the fees out weighed the benefits I would consider my position. The EU army isn’t defined so I couldn’t say! The real answer is membership would need to have a significant measurable negative impact on the UK.
     
  5. Nitefly

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 24, 2005

    Posts: 30,491

    I’ve been sat on this for awhile, but I suppose it would have to be something that could actually be sensibly argued to be a bad thing. If the membership sums were actually dubiously high, then, sure, that would be a good reason to suggest leaving.

    European army. Hmm, maybe? I’m not immediately highly suspicious of the idea.
     
  6. Skillmister

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 3, 2009

    Posts: 19,011

    Location: Wales

    Can't wait for another 18 months of uncertainty whilst we wait for a leadership contest and more failed Brexit negotiations
     
  7. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 2,576

    It would vary a lot as although people who voted to stay in the EU had a wide range of views they all voted for the exact same option , clearly defined and easy to deliver. The difference to a no deal brexit supporter is those voting to stay tend to be more fact based and ration in their thinking. This is shown by every time you ask a supporter of a no deal brexit to explain how it economically benefits the UK they ignore the question, deflect onto another topic, anything to avoid explaining the benefits of the very thing they support.
     
  8. FortuitousFluke

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 7, 2011

    Posts: 3,405

    Location: Cambridgeshire

    Bright side, when Boris gets in he will keep all sides happy. WTO Brexit for the leavers, garden bridge across the channel for us remainers, maybe with an airport at the halfway point.
     
  9. Cern

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 3, 2008

    Posts: 3,131

    Location: London

    Just as you cannot get a unified answer from Leavers about what Brexit actually means (everything from Norway style to No Deal), there's a spectrum of opinion on the Remain side too.

    Personally I'd consider myself a strong Europhile and generally pro EU, but not to the point of blind loyalty or a wish for a federal Europe. There's an incredible diversity of identities across Europe that the EU will never dilute, nor does it seek to. I've never understood why so many Brits (especially English) feel their identity is threatened by the EU when pretty much every other EU country is equally protective of their own self identity. So why would a federal Europe be a natural end point?

    The EU isn't perfect and there's stuff that needs a rethink or reform, but I'd rather see the UK push for this change from within. And I mean REALLY push, by building bridges and alliances, not the pathetic wishy washy attempt at change that Cameron tried to push for, or the selfish UK-centric demands made in the past which have resulted in vetoes and exemptions. Proper consensual change.

    There's other EU countries which agree with the UK on many issues, if only we could get past the "us and them" mentality and build some alliances. Bit late now though with Brexit burning all of our bridges and trashing our reputation.
     
  10. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,056

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    We're not asking for another same referendum. The questions are different. We now understand the only two ways in which the UK can leave the EU - the negotiated withdrawal agreement or a no deal - and we as a nation now have a far more complete understanding about the implications of leaving the EU under both of those methods. And then the other option is to remain, and that's a valid democratic choice too. We have a general election every five years, and the previous losing parties aren't eliminated from the next.

    After the past three years of muddle and extreme pain for the nation, the true betrayal of democracy would be to deny the electorate their democratic right to express their view today.
     
  11. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 2,576

    That is the democratic approach, UK democracy is not one off event and evolves over time. The only three options we have are a no deal brexit, a deal or no brexit. Understandably the most pro brexit supporters are against another referendum given the 60% polling for remain now. Their argument is it is democratic to block democracy.
     
  12. GordyR

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 1, 2003

    Posts: 4,606

    Location: Essex

    While this isn’t exactly what you’re asking, If I was given a single good argument that I was unable to dismantle in seconds, I would switch to being a Brexiter immediately.

    In three years of intensive debates, such an argument has failed to materialise.
     
  13. matt100

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 31, 2004

    Posts: 11,126

    Location: Salisbury

    I'm much the same.. I was personally happy with what the gammons have taken to calling BRINO which then diverged further over time/moved to some sort of hybrid.

    The fact they've all got so stuck on everything (specifically nothing) all at once is fantastic... Because its undeliverable.

    BRINO is still Brexit, we would not be members of the EU any more. Whether it's too close could be seen as irrelevant considering the fundamental point is we would have fulfilled the terms of the referendum and left.
     
  14. DarkHorizon472

    Mobster

    Joined: May 16, 2007

    Posts: 2,576

    That’s my view as well, no one can explain it in any detail.
     
  15. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,056

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    Throughout the past three years, I think I've learned a lot more than I previously knew about our relationship with the EU, and also what others think about it and (sometimes) why they think that way.

    On balance, what I've learned has moved me from being slightly pro-EU but with a good deal of sympathy for some Brexit points of view to being a far greater advocate of EU membership. There are still some clear frustrations, but conversely I've not really seen any compelling or reasoned evidence of benefits of leaving.

    If we have a good, integrated and collegiate relationship with the EU, then what could arise that would make us renounce ties, as we're part of the decision making process? Membership fees have been proven to not be exorbitant - far from it. We cannot be forced to take the Euro, so if we do it means we've chosen to along with adopting the monetary policy that comes with it. EU army? Presumably with our experience and current status this is something we'd be leading and driving.

    How about you? Where's your red line?
     
  16. RedvGreen

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 2, 2009

    Posts: 3,388

    Location: Midlands

    I am of the same viewpoint. I was keenly into politics before the referendum, yet I didn't know a great deal about the EU prior to them compared to what I know now. And based on this, I know for a fact that the vast majority of Leave voters whom I know/work with/related to, do not know anything about the EU at all. The discussions we have literally go around in circles where they start off saying about democracy being subverted, then I point out that the referendum was not legally binding anyway, and it was corrupt/overspend/foreign-state interference. Then they change their tune and go full-on psycho-rage about being a betrayer or young/naive, or not able to remember the better days in the 1970's before the EU - when I then point out the poverty, lack of trade/food/resources/healthcare they then get angry again and say about immigration, so I point out that we have been able to control it for decades, it's just that we didn't, because the Government are lazy and they also realise that the EU affords us sooo many benefits through freedom of movement. Then they start about democracy... ad infinitum.

    I would honestly love to change my stance to pro-Brexit to be unified with a handful of my outspoken bigotted peers, but i've not had any reason or evidence to remotely bring me close to accepting it. In fact everything i've been told has pushed me further towards pro-EU.
     
  17. ricid

    Gangster

    Joined: Sep 26, 2018

    Posts: 276

    To be fair I think we didn't implement controls on EU citizens because everyone hated the idea of having to carry ID cards, rather than laziness. It's easy to forget how anti immigration the last Labour government were because the current lot are even worse.
     
  18. Amp34

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2005

    Posts: 28,521

    Location: Canada

    Same here. I’m going to change it to proxy vote from now on, although it would have helped this time as my proxy is out of the country too.
     
  19. chrcoluk

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 27, 2015

    Posts: 3,140

  20. Entai

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Feb 28, 2004

    Posts: 71,961


    Thought the cry is always that the government is anti Brexit ?

    And anyway the Government has nothing whatsoever to do with organisng the EU Elections.