Jump to content
Davebrad

Brexit again...

Recommended Posts

Doesn't Switzerland belong to Schengen and has some sort of freedom of movement? It was part of the deal they signed to join the EU's free trade area. It can do its own trade deals but I think from memory it has accepted freedom of movement in part in order to access the market. We could have that but we'd have to have freedom of movement. We could do trade deals then if we wished but they pay money to the EU for the privilege of access to their 600 million customers and have no seat at the top table of the EU as we do. I don't think No Dealers would accept that.

It's the kind of compromise that might be attractive for those who want to compromise but No Dealers would say it gives away too much to the EU and remainers would say we already have a better deal by staying in because we do have a seat at the top table and help shape decisions and policies.

I may have got some of that awry because the Swiss-EU relationship is complicated, very. I think there are over 200 treaties between them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mario said:

Thats no problem my old Granny always used to say "If you dont know ask  "

As we get to the sharp end I might embarrass myself with more queries !

You will get plenty of replies, mine tend to be short and simple, others will give fuller versions

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Doesn't Switzerland belong to Schengen and has some sort of freedom of movement? It was part of the deal they signed to join the EU's free trade area. It can do its own trade deals but I think from memory it has accepted freedom of movement in part in order to access the market. We could have that but we'd have to have freedom of movement. We could do trade deals then if we wished but they pay money to the EU for the privilege of access to their 600 million customers and have no seat at the top table of the EU as we do. I don't think No Dealers would accept that.

It's the kind of compromise that might be attractive for those who want to compromise but No Dealers would say it gives away too much to the EU and remainers would say we already have a better deal by staying in because we do have a seat at the top table and help shape decisions and policies.

I may have got some of that awry because the Swiss-EU relationship is complicated, very. I think there are over 200 treaties between them.

 

The Swiss have been neutral for a long time, a secretive financial centre, like plenty of simple referenda, plenty of rich immigrants and cuckoo clocks. Not been at war with neighbours for a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They certainly attract the rich. Audrey Hepburn and Roger Moore had homes there. Good efficient railway system too and chocolate!

And they are not silly enough to cut off their noses to spite their face (as we seem to be doing) as they pay money to the EU to access their huge market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mario said:

With reference to the hard border with Ireland could someone explain to me how at least 4 EU countries have a soft border with Switzerland yet there is a song and dance about our border with Ireland and what the difference is ? serious question.

The EU insist on a hard boarder, even though apparently alternatives have been offered/suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fosse69 said:

A hypocrite who voted twice against his party and government, who now expels MPs that do the same to him. He is unbelievable.

Didn't jezza make a career out of voting against his party..... whatever happened to Alistair Campbell? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheSage said:

Doesn't Switzerland belong to Schengen and has some sort of freedom of movement? It was part of the deal they signed to join the EU's free trade area. It can do its own trade deals but I think from memory it has accepted freedom of movement in part in order to access the market. We could have that but we'd have to have freedom of movement. We could do trade deals then if we wished but they pay money to the EU for the privilege of access to their 600 million customers and have no seat at the top table of the EU as we do. I don't think No Dealers would accept that.

It's the kind of compromise that might be attractive for those who want to compromise but No Dealers would say it gives away too much to the EU and remainers would say we already have a better deal by staying in because we do have a seat at the top table and help shape decisions and policies.

I may have got some of that awry because the Swiss-EU relationship is complicated, very. I think there are over 200 treaties between them.

 

Here we go, a little bit of honesty shining through.

 

You surely agree that brexiters (not "no dealers" as you are trying to call them) will not and can not accept free movement of people in any capacity?

You surely must agree, as an expert on why and what brexiteers were voting for, that they were voting to be outside of the free movement of people?

 

If you want to remain, just say it. Don't pretend we can have brexit and still be in the EU though, because we can't.

Stop trying to label people you disagree with as extremists. There is nothing extreme about wanting a clean brexit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mario said:

With reference to the hard border with Ireland could someone explain to me how at least 4 EU countries have a soft border with Switzerland yet there is a song and dance about our border with Ireland and what the difference is ? serious question.

The EU have admitted to fabricating the backstop issue in order to create leverage with which to pressure us into conceding.

It's on camera, i posted it in this thread a week or two ago.

Today the Leo Varadkar, the Irish taioseach has even said today that as far as Ireland a concerned, an "invisible" smart border is not what they want. They want Northern Ireland (and therefore the UK) to be in the same customs union.

If the UK is in the same customs union as the EU then it severely restricts our ability to strike trade deals with other countries such as USA. It would also muddy the sovereignty water.

 

The EU cannot afford for brexit to be a success because of the rising euroscepticism across the union. If we go it may only take one other significant net contributor to leave and the EU collapses. That is why they will try anything but giving the UK a fair deal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was canvassing for Labour on Saturday and spoke with a man who said he couldn't vote for us again. He was 72 and had always voted for us, even had a poster in his window at the 2017 election. That's been replaced by a Daily Express window sticker saying 'get us out' or something like that. Felt very sad for him really and regretted (to an extent) slagging leavers off as thick racists. Having said that, it astonishes me that people who are so at risk are prepared to accept a no-deal exit. Our constituency, being rural and relying on agriculture and manufacturing industry, is 13th most at risk in the entire country from a no-deal but he, and others, seem to be so fixated on getting out whatever the cost. Our constituency also only has a tory majority of about 600 so he must be aware that him withholding his vote could genuinely affect the result of any election, to the extent that it could hand the tories victory instead of the party he's voted for for the last 54 years. It also brought home to me what a difficult position Labour are in. For every voter like the gentleman I spoke to, there's a voter who refuses to accept anything other than a second referendum. What a sodding mess.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Preference would be to remain, their core support is in the metro areas, who voted remain or very close to it. Deprived areas and the North will be promised infrastructure investment, and social spend over 5 years not just for a year as with Johnson. If no-deal has happened, stop US links and go back to our EU neighbours, which would be the new deal.

So grass roots and heartland has moved south?

What you seem to be suggesting is that Labour will offer people in different areas what they want to hear to win their votes..... pretty much the same as the Tories and others....... stop links with the USA because he doesn't like trump..... and if we are out of EU take us back in to get the votes of metro and southern areas while offering the deprived north a few quid to help they will never see.

What about the 10% share of company shares and the £500 bonus he talked about.... Will that benefit the deprived north?..... Will he restrict his infrastructure spending to the poor north?

That's the new deal???

What part of that will bridge the divide?..... bring the people together again?..... heal the wounds?

That's as bad as the Tory crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I was canvassing for Labour on Saturday and spoke with a man who said he couldn't vote for us again. He was 72 and had always voted for us, even had a poster in his window at the 2017 election. That's been replaced by a Daily Express window sticker saying 'get us out' or something like that. Felt very sad for him really and regretted (to an extent) slagging leavers off as thick racists. Having said that, it astonishes me that people who are so at risk are prepared to accept a no-deal exit. Our constituency, being rural and relying on agriculture and manufacturing industry, is 13th most at risk in the entire country from a no-deal but he, and others, seem to be so fixated on getting out whatever the cost. Our constituency also only has a tory majority of about 600 so he must be aware that him withholding his vote could genuinely affect the result of any election, to the extent that it could hand the tories victory instead of the party he's voted for for the last 54 years. It also brought home to me what a difficult position Labour are in. For every voter like the gentleman I spoke to, there's a voter who refuses to accept anything other than a second referendum. What a sodding mess.

If Labour fight this battle along the lines of the 60s/70s campaigns..... rich v poor..... haves v have nots...... entitled v disenfranchised.... they will lose.

That's a different war of a different time..... as world war 1 generals found out in world war 2 when they used the same tactics against a mechanized army.

The stark facts are rich and poor support leave and remain..... old and young support leave and remain..... north and south support leave and remain...... most with a passion..... which ever way parties go they disenfranchise half the population.

People were offered a new campaign, a new war of sorts, a new enemy (bad analogy)....... Labour are trying to be Switzerland..... leavers and remainers don't like it and Labour will pay the price from both factions and the people in the middle.

I'm not shouting praises for the Tories or any other party...... for this system to work effectively.... to stop violent swings to the extreme right or left we have to have 2 (at least) strong parties to keep us in the centre ground where real people live.

Just my ramblings as usual, with plenty of ...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to brexit for a minute...... and middle ground compromises.

The tenets of leave are                      .........                     ........                                  Remain

1 Stop freedom of movement....... middle ground is restriction?                Keep

2 Unhindered free trade......             middle ground ?                                      EU trade

3 Sovereignty of UK law......             middle ground ?                                        ?

Anyone fill in the blanks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, geosname said:

Didn't jezza make a career out of voting against his party..... whatever happened to Alistair Campbell? 

Back benchers have the freedom to vote against their parties, but when the  Foreign Secretary votes against his  government that is a completely different scale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

I was canvassing for Labour on Saturday and spoke with a man who said he couldn't vote for us again. He was 72 and had always voted for us, even had a poster in his window at the 2017 election. That's been replaced by a Daily Express window sticker saying 'get us out' or something like that. Felt very sad for him really and regretted (to an extent) slagging leavers off as thick racists. Having said that, it astonishes me that people who are so at risk are prepared to accept a no-deal exit. Our constituency, being rural and relying on agriculture and manufacturing industry, is 13th most at risk in the entire country from a no-deal but he, and others, seem to be so fixated on getting out whatever the cost. Our constituency also only has a tory majority of about 600 so he must be aware that him withholding his vote could genuinely affect the result of any election, to the extent that it could hand the tories victory instead of the party he's voted for for the last 54 years. It also brought home to me what a difficult position Labour are in. For every voter like the gentleman I spoke to, there's a voter who refuses to accept anything other than a second referendum. What a sodding mess.

The so called Brexit Scam, shift the focus of an election onto facets of the EU instead of the economy as in the last 2 elections, now the argument will be a before or after Brexit election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, geosname said:

So grass roots and heartland has moved south?

What you seem to be suggesting is that Labour will offer people in different areas what they want to hear to win their votes..... pretty much the same as the Tories and others....... stop links with the USA because he doesn't like trump..... and if we are out of EU take us back in to get the votes of metro and southern areas while offering the deprived north a few quid to help they will never see.

What about the 10% share of company shares and the £500 bonus he talked about.... Will that benefit the deprived north?..... Will he restrict his infrastructure spending to the poor north?

That's the new deal???

What part of that will bridge the divide?..... bring the people together again?..... heal the wounds?

That's as bad as the Tory crap.

There are Metro areas in the Midlands and the North, obviously London is the largest, although a lot of the industries with decent pay and unions have gone. Trading with the US would mean adopting lower standards on imports but retaining EU standards as well for exports with no say in their changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, geosname said:

That worked well in the euro elections

Phoney war, the regulars either stayed in their barracks or were stood down, only the irregulars went on parade. Hardly surprising since poor turnouts are the norm unlike national elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, geosname said:

Back to brexit for a minute...... and middle ground compromises.

The tenets of leave are                      .........                     ........                                  Remain

1 Stop freedom of movement....... middle ground is restriction?                Keep

2 Unhindered free trade......             middle ground ?                                      EU trade

3 Sovereignty of UK law......             middle ground ?                                        ?

Anyone fill in the blanks?

Difficult to comment as I am a believer in if its not broke don't fix it, repair/improve parts to keep it going.

1. Movement to work, will the increased monitoring required be effective and economic (Residency etc is a national decision)

2. Free trade is only possible in trade groups, otherwise tariffs

3. Sovereignty is not at stake, rules of trade and employment is what it is really about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the Sunday Times revealed a week ago, you can get around the 2\3rds majority needed for an election in the Fixed Term Parliaments Act by passing a one line bill that says “notwithstanding the FTPA, we will have a general election on X date”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Advert




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy