National News Brexit - the Deal or No Deal poll

Brexit - Deal or No Deal?

  • Deal

    Votes: 51 29.1%
  • No Deal

    Votes: 77 44.0%
  • Call in the Donald

    Votes: 2 1.1%
  • Call in Noel Edmonds

    Votes: 8 4.6%
  • I don't care anymore

    Votes: 37 21.1%

  • Total voters
    175
I appreciate the reply, Essex.

I can see that the EU has developed and expanded from the original Common market, but I'm still not clear what the problems you have with it are, especailly as you acknowledge that the bureaucracy is a burden for all states, and will be adopted into UK law. i'm sure that working in public sector procurement that there are a lot of good reasons why some elements of bureaucracy are necessary to ensure standards and prevent corruption. When we trade with other countries we have to find a legal system to adjudicate disputes which are acceptable to both. That's the same whether it's China, Belgium or the US

So again I can't see what the specifics are that you object to- I can see the EU has a bureaucracy- but we need bureaucracy, it has a judiciary that can decide international disputes- and we need one of those too. I still can's see why many proponents of Brexit talk about the UK being a "vassal" of a group that we were a part of and contributed to shaping its laws and policy. One we leave, of course we'll stop doing that.

The bureaucracy is multi-layered & duplicated (thats not free).
The EU judiciary digs to far into what a Nation should decide in its own best interest, they operate under civil law, we have used common law since the Middle Ages.
If we take the "deal" offered we remain embedded in the EU with no say at all.
The redistribution of wealth/money maybe admirable on many human aspects but is not sustainable, somebody will always be "bottom of the league" and someone at the top.
Trading with other countries (outside of the EU bloc) can be developed and continued under WTO with the other 163 member countries, the UK could choose to lower tariffs or waive them altogether to stimulate free trade.
At the end of the day business will overcome the change, how hard that is made seems to be what people fear.................. not me.
 
Yeah I did actually - but who listens to Trudeau anyway? And really, it's one of the same, and one can argue, the coverage Obama got before the vote vs this, it's a similar level of meddling - let's face it, no one gives two shitzits in general about what the Pole said and most people won't even know it was even said. But most people commented about Obama's intervention at the time because he telling us to vote Remain in very clear terms - pure meddling in our process.

I think Davis was not incompetent, but his boss both made his job hard (as Raab confirmed and no one wanted the job when he left) and being as such, she has rightly taken the heat. I don't get why you dislike Davis so much. Bit of an odd one! Your ire should be forced at Ollie Robbins, the real Brexit Secretary, and very much the man who did the negotiations.

Your Obama example smacks of "oooh, look a squirrel" to defend the indefensible.

This MP is a member of our parliament so has a responsibility to not subvert/bypass it yet he tried to get a foreign Govt to veto any deal. It is irrelevant if the people, other than the Polish Govt, listened to the MP in this case.

Obama on the other hand commented as a foreign leader (ie. Not a member of our main democratic institution) whose country maybe affected like other foreign leaders. Trudeau got listened to as his country had just taken 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU and that deal had far less complexity.

I also don't remember Obama arguing for parliamentary sovereignty like this MP who is now trying to subvert that very thing.

As I say you're response really comes over as classic "whataboutism".

I don't like Davis because he is an incompetent who appears to have got away with wasting many £millions and vital time whilst being incompetent in a job that was vital to preparing this country for Brexit. In addition, he made up blatant lies about what work was being done and then tried to conceal it, yet he brazenly carried on doing the job, or rather still doing nothing wasting time and money. His arrogance in doing this, sums him up.

Why did he bother staying in the job as long as he did or going to negotiate if he was so hamstrung by May?

He had the opportunity to prepare the ground by researching the impact/scenario planning of all the main options. He didn't and it is very basic business planning which doesn't . This isn't difficult stuff, it is a basic requirement for a Council or business project, let alone for something as complex as Brexit (40+ years of links) and vital to our long term future. May didn't stop that, why would she as it doesn't stop her picking the type of Brexit she wants? So to use a cliché, "fail to plan then plan to fail" and his arrogance was central to that.

If he and his dept had done the very basic levels of planning then this country would be better prepared for whatever the outcome as the potential problems would be known. As it is our Govt Depts/Civil Service are scrambling to prepare with very little time. The Border/Customs Service leaked documents on it show how unprepared we are.

In addition, Davis was one of Hard Brexiteers (along with the ERG etc) that tried to control May so by doing that helped shape her approach.

Ironically, if Brexit doesn't happen Davis can take his share of the blame (although a lot less than May) for that.
 
Brexit is a house of cards- built by charlatans. Could you Brexiteers explain to me how you were oppressed by the EU? Was it the generous duty free allowances when you came back from holidays? The clean beaches? The lack of passport controls? What are the tangible ways the EU made your life worse?

I'd just like to add if you're relying on Bernard Jenkin for your political analysis I hope you're still relying on Nick Merry for financial advice. And we have a number of extrmists active in this country. Some supported by members of this board. Jo Cox MP was murdered by a far right activist as was Makram Ali. Darren Osborne who attacked the Finsbury Park Mosque also had plans to kill jeremy Corbyn.

If thats the best you can offer for a reason to stay in the EU then it says a lot.

I dont rely Bernard Jenkin for anything, ive never voted Tory and never will but unlike many I will listen and make my own judgements on what people have to say. Given you remainers want to make a huge deal out of one polish guy trying to manipulate democracy its interesting how quiet you are about his accusation that remainers are popping over to speak to the EU and advise them to give us nothing to force a second referendum. Now I dont know if that has happened or not but given the remain press or remainers in general havent screamed foul play I would be pretty certain its happening. As for finances, perhaps Nick Merry is in charge of the EU coffers.

Be careful getting off your high horse.
 
If thats the best you can offer for a reason to stay in the EU then it says a lot.

I dont rely Bernard Jenkin for anything, ive never voted Tory and never will but unlike many I will listen and make my own judgements on what people have to say. Given you remainers want to make a huge deal out of one polish guy trying to manipulate democracy its interesting how quiet you are about his accusation that remainers are popping over to speak to the EU and advise them to give us nothing to force a second referendum. Now I dont know if that has happened or not but given the remain press or remainers in general havent screamed foul play I would be pretty certain its happening. As for finances, perhaps Nick Merry is in charge of the EU coffers.

Be careful getting off your high horse.

So you don't know if the Remainers are going over to the EU to ask for the EU to give us nothing and because it hasn't been reported on it must be true?! Rightio!

Because leaks about Brexit haven't been 10 a penny from Europe and Parliament/Govt! Also, the EU have already negotiated and have a deal on the table so those remainer MPs would be a bit late. This is what that MP is trying to block and any other deal that may be negotiated should things change.

Also the huge difference is this Leave MP is established fact as he was the one who tweeted it.
 
So you don't know if the Remainers are going over to the EU to ask for the EU to give us nothing and because it hasn't been reported on it must be true?! Rightio!

Because leaks about Brexit haven't been 10 a penny from Europe and Parliament/Govt! Also, the EU have already negotiated and have a deal on the table so those remainer MPs would be a bit late. This is what that MP is trying to block and any other deal that may be negotiated should things change.

Also the huge difference is this Leave MP is established fact as he was the one who tweeted it.

If the accusation Bernard Jenkin made was incorrect there would be uproar, there wasnt. Telling the EU not to change the deal to try and force another referendum is interfering with democracy, something you seem to get very hot under the collar about, but only when it suites your agenda. Just another hypocrite.
 
If the accusation Bernard Jenkin made was incorrect there would be uproar, there wasnt. Telling the EU not to change the deal to try and force another referendum is interfering with democracy, something you seem to get very hot under the collar about, but only when it suites your agenda. Just another hypocrite.

You yourself said you don't know if it is fact yet now take it as fact because the media haven't reported on it. Rightio!

You don't think the Brexit media, like the Telegraph, Express or Mail would be all over this if there was any substance? Bear in mind, the enemies of people/traitors headlines for judges/Remain MPs etc they've done in the past. Can you direct me to where this media has mentioned it/substantiated his claim?

Again, why would Remain MPs tell the EU to do this when a) the negotiations/deal have already happened and b) the EU have very publically said they will not renegotiate the Withdrawal deal? May has already confirmed there is no further negotiation by coming back with nothing changed from before the last vote.

Was there uproar in Parliament about the MP requesting the Polish Govt veto any deal? My comments have come directly from HIS TWEETING that he had done it and the subsequent Twitter conversation.

No hypocrisy on my part, I've presented a fact with an MP trying to subvert Parliament, you've made a unsubstantiated claim and decided to present it as reality based on absolutely nothing. IF you can substantiate it as an actual fact, I will condemn that as well.
 
If the accusation Bernard Jenkin made was incorrect there would be uproar, there wasnt. Telling the EU not to change the deal to try and force another referendum is interfering with democracy, something you seem to get very hot under the collar about, but only when it suites your agenda. Just another hypocrite.

Brexiteers lie all the time. Boris Johnson began lying about the Eu when he was posted to Brussels for the Telegraph after being fired by The Times for lying. He used to make up stories for the paper about Brussels banning straight cucumbers and Prawn cocktail crisps.
 
Meanwhile

The head of Airbus today launched an astonishing attack on the "disgraceful" Tory government over Brexit.

Chief executive Tom Enders issued a naked threat to leave the UK by warning it was "madness" to assume the firm will stay.

And in a direct warning to the government he said: "If there's a no-deal Brexit, we at Airbus will have to make potentially very harmful decisions for the UK."

Business Minister Richard Harrington gave a very frank reaction to the news.

He said: "This is a disaster for business. I am very happy to be public about it and very happy if the prime minister decides I am not the right person [to be business minister as a result.]"

Mr Enders' video message in the latest business blow to Britain Britain as the March 29 date to leave ticks closer.

In recent days Dyson has announced its head office will move to Singapore and P&O Ferries re-flagged its whole fleet to Cyprus.

Airbus employs more than 14,000 people in the UK with around 110,000 more jobs connected in supply chains.

But who cares. 14000 jobs- piece of P**s Selling jam to the Canadians will soon sort that out.
 
To be fair, Airbus is 11% owned by the French state, 11% owned by the German state, and 4% owned by the Spanish state.

So it's not exactly surprising that they're somewhat pro-EU as a company! I imagine most of the 14,000 workers there were Remain voters......
 
It's their own fault, you mean?

No, I mean that anyone not expecting Airbus to reduce its operations in the UK upon Brexit, of any colour let alone No Deal, was somewhere between ignorant and delusional!

Of course some Brexit voters are ignorant, and some are delusional, but others will have factored in European companies like Airbus reducing their activity in the UK but believe that a low tax regime and ex-EU trade deals will be able to compensate by attracting other businesses instead.

Personally I think that's a massive risk to take - particularly given the level of incompetence that is regularly being displayed by both the UK's government and opposition - but it's at least a rational position.
 
Perhaps those who are strong supporters of Brexit could let us how many jobs they expect to go, to the nearest thousand, say, and how they see them being replaced.
 
Forecasts should be taken with a pinch of salt, much like Mark Carneys forecast on house prices and George Osbornes prediction on unemployment
 
Yeah, forecasting and planning in general is pointless. We should stumble forwards hoping for the best.

It's the only way that makes sense.

Lack of planning seems a Leaver trait :)p) and just claiming it will all be ok.

They had a Brexiteer, journalist James Delingpole arguing for leaving on WTO terms on This Week last night. It would have been amusing if it wasn't so worrying (how many of the ERG are like this??) as he genuinely didn't have a clue about any of the detail involved with WTO terms. Every answer was basically it will be ok in the end.

He genuinely couldn't grasp the basics about tariffs or how they applied. For example, we can't offer preferential rates to EU countries (ie. 0%) as we'd have to offer them to everybody else under WTO terms. He argued 0% tariffs would be a starting point to negotiate trade deals but as was pointed out by Andrew Neal, why would they then negotiate when they already have tariff free access.

This is a journalist who has argued for the WTO option/a hard Brexit via various Brexit media. Fair enough he wants to leave but if you are going to argue for a particular option (especially on TV) at the least you'd learn what you are arguing for!
 
Brexiteers lie all the time. Boris Johnson began lying about the Eu when he was posted to Brussels for the Telegraph after being fired by The Times for lying. He used to make up stories for the paper about Brussels banning straight cucumbers and Prawn cocktail crisps.
Remainers lie all the time, we were promised an emergency budget if we voted leave.
 
Your Obama example smacks of "oooh, look a squirrel" to defend the indefensible.

This MP is a member of our parliament so has a responsibility to not subvert/bypass it yet he tried to get a foreign Govt to veto any deal. It is irrelevant if the people, other than the Polish Govt, listened to the MP in this case.

Obama on the other hand commented as a foreign leader (ie. Not a member of our main democratic institution) whose country maybe affected like other foreign leaders. Trudeau got listened to as his country had just taken 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU and that deal had far less complexity.

I also don't remember Obama arguing for parliamentary sovereignty like this MP who is now trying to subvert that very thing.

As I say you're response really comes over as classic "whataboutism".

I don't like Davis because he is an incompetent who appears to have got away with wasting many £millions and vital time whilst being incompetent in a job that was vital to preparing this country for Brexit. In addition, he made up blatant lies about what work was being done and then tried to conceal it, yet he brazenly carried on doing the job, or rather still doing nothing wasting time and money. His arrogance in doing this, sums him up.

Why did he bother staying in the job as long as he did or going to negotiate if he was so hamstrung by May?

He had the opportunity to prepare the ground by researching the impact/scenario planning of all the main options. He didn't and it is very basic business planning which doesn't . This isn't difficult stuff, it is a basic requirement for a Council or business project, let alone for something as complex as Brexit (40+ years of links) and vital to our long term future. May didn't stop that, why would she as it doesn't stop her picking the type of Brexit she wants? So to use a cliché, "fail to plan then plan to fail" and his arrogance was central to that.

If he and his dept had done the very basic levels of planning then this country would be better prepared for whatever the outcome as the potential problems would be known. As it is our Govt Depts/Civil Service are scrambling to prepare with very little time. The Border/Customs Service leaked documents on it show how unprepared we are.

In addition, Davis was one of Hard Brexiteers (along with the ERG etc) that tried to control May so by doing that helped shape her approach.

Ironically, if Brexit doesn't happen Davis can take his share of the blame (although a lot less than May) for that.
It's only an issue because of what side said what. It was ok for the President of the USA to forcefully tell the UK population that if you think we'll trade with you outside the EU, we won't. That was a strong clear message to stay, interjecting into the core of the biggest ever UK referendum.

As outgoing President of the USA, he had no legal or moral basis to get that involved or opine on trade policy for both countries right? I'm not surprised you don't see it as a problem though. :D

As for DD. It's so cute you have such ire for him. He had little power, his dept were neutered but somehow it's all his fault. At least DD has an opinion eh? What does Corybn actually think? What is Labours policy? How will a "people's vote" work?
 
It's only an issue because of what side said what.
No it isn’t, it is a completely materially different example that MO has explained clearly. I’d raise the opposite accusation that you have blinded yourself to the obvious difference because of your viewpoint.
 
Back
Top Bottom