Mrs May, Hero of the Brexiters.

[geared]

So what's the position on the single market?

Free movement of people?

Pating the EU money for access to the single market?

 

 

It wasnt very clear at all, just lots of promises.

 

If we want access to the single market we will have to accept free movement of people and we will have to pay the EU for it.

 

no if's or buts

[retep]

"In the post-war period Winston Churchill argued passionately for Western Europe to come together, to promote free trade, and to build institutions which would endure so that our continent would never again see such bloodshed."

 

And then along came Merkel.

[unbeliever]

If we want access to the single market we will have to accept free movement of people and we will have to pay the EU for it.

 

no if's or buts

 

This is not true.

 

Unless you mean single market membership.

 

One of the (many) great deceits by the remain camp during the referendum campaign was to conflate single market access and single market membership.

perhaps they confused you.

To which are you referring?

[PeteMorris]

If memory serves me...I went to the polling booth with a piece of paper which asked one question...Leave or remain.

 

No questions about what manifesto I wanted if I voted one way or another...Just Leave or Remain.

 

The fact remains (unfortunate word in the circumstances) that it was up to politicians to work out the details if the vote went one way or another. They didn't...It was if we remain, nothing changes, and the leave vote is never going to happen so we don't need a plan for that.

 

Oooops....Cameron....Didn't expect that...I'd better run and hide!

[L00b]

Yes. That was a lie. Where's the world-war, and above all where's the immediate devastating recession.

I feel obliged to remind you that no "world war" was promised, only the likelihood that disunity might eventually bring about intra-European conflicts as last seen in central Europe the mid-90s, and for centuries before that.

 

It wasn't the best of Cameron's arguments, by quite some distance. It was just an emotive appeal, and arguably not an irrational one on the basis of historical records. Yet, with an underlying component of realpolitik, for those who follow news beyond the confines of the UK: considering Putin is far from done with the Ukraine and the EU more generally, let's just hope that Cameron's appeal never proves prescient.

This is not true.

 

Unless you mean single market membership.

 

One of the (many) great deceits by the remain camp during the referendum campaign was to conflate single market access and single market membership.

perhaps they confused you.

To which are you referring?

Personally, I don't accept that: I made it clear all along, pre- and post-referendum, that the core aspect of negotiations in case of Brexit would be the extent of the access preserved, the price tag that goes with it, and the proportionality between both.

 

Single market access has a cost, that can always be expressed as tariff and non-tariff barriers, irrespective of their level. Where NTBs can best be exemplified in context is e.g. in relation to preserving the City's passporting rights. If the EU's negotiating position is "take freedom of movement or you can't keep them" and that's their backstop insofar as passporting rights are concerned, them's your apples, deal with it: take the freedom of movement, or lose the City, its activity and tax contribution. Mrs May, here's the deep blue sea, now meet the devil.

 

Kid yourself not, there absolutely will be a price tag to pay for continuing to deal with the EU as a market. It's the cost/benefit analysis for the deal you want to look at, not the semantics.

Edited August 31, 2016 by L00b
added linky

[unbeliever]

"In the post-war period Winston Churchill argued passionately for Western Europe to come together, to promote free trade, and to build institutions which would endure so that our continent would never again see such bloodshed."

 

Okay. That's nice. I'm not sure it's entirely true as he seemed far more interested in the UK being part of a union of the english speaking peoples, but it hardly matters does it. Unless we're going to use "what would churchill have done" to resolve all our political questions from now on?

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2016 at 16:48 ----------

 

I feel obliged to remind you that no "world war" was promised, only the likelihood that disunity might eventually bring about intra-European conflicts as last seen in central Europe the mid-90s, and for centuries before that.

 

It wasn't the best of Cameron's arguments, by quite some distance. It was just an emotive appeal, and arguably not an irrational one on the basis of historical records. Yet, with an underlying component of realpolitik, for those who follow news beyond the confines of the UK: considering Putin is far from done with the Ukraine and the EU more generally, let's just hope that Cameron's appeal never proves prescient.

 

Nor was the £350m/week headline the whole of the story, but it seems that attacking the headline is fair game in this thread.

[Mister M]

I hear Mrs May on the radio to-day re-stating that Brexit will be Brexit, nothing more nothing less. I think she was firing a shot across the bows of the moaning half wits who want another vote on the in/out referendum. Thankfully she is standing by her guns, but I wish she would invoke article 50 and set in stone our decision to leave the corrupt and failed institution that is/was the EU.

 

Angel1.

 

Not sure if you can spin it that she was a hero of the Brexiters, as she voted to remain.

[Santo]

Not sure if you can spin it that she was a hero of the Brexiters, as she voted to remain.

 

Errrr oh yeah. Excellent point!

 

Raised after just 3 pages....

[geared]

This is not true.

 

Unless you mean single market membership.

 

One of the (many) great deceits by the remain camp during the referendum campaign was to conflate single market access and single market membership.

perhaps they confused you.

To which are you referring?

 

Single market membership (with benefits) is how it was sold isn't it?

Since every country in the world has access to the single market.

 

We want all the benefits, but still want to negotiate our own trade deals.

 

Isn't that what Boris and co were saying??

[999tigger]

There are no requirements at all. But there is a political mandate. That has value.

 

The political mandate relates only to the fact we leave. Not the terms. This is why brexit means brexit is pretty meaningless because other than leaving the EU it means different things to different people.

 

Were that to be reviewed by a party from a general election, then that would cancel it out.

 

Not that im advocating a second referendum.

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2016 at 17:04 ----------

 

Then no politician has any mandate.

 

There can be nobody not buried in a deep hole in the run up to the vote who was not made aware that the £350m/week was not the net payment and that the real number was half that. Everybody know.

Yes it was a lie, but it was not my lie and I'm done apologising for it.

Those who campaigned for remain made sure that we knew it wasn't real.

Leave still won. Sorry this upsets you, but we did.

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2016 at 16:07 ----------

 

 

 

You don't have to pay for access to the single market. Do you mean single market membership?

 

I think free movement is probably out. Which is a shame.

 

 

I think you will find membership of the EEA requires payment to the EU. You cna have partial access like Switzerland or full access like Norway. They both pay the EU billions of £'s.

 

If free movement is out then you wont get access they have been very clear on that.

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2016 at 17:10 ----------

 

This is not true.

 

Unless you mean single market membership.

 

One of the (many) great deceits by the remain camp during the referendum campaign was to conflate single market access and single market membership.

perhaps they confused you.

To which are you referring?

 

There are two main examples of countries with single market access being the Swiss and the Norwegians.

 

Both have had to accept that membership of the EEA has included free movement of people and making payments to the EU. The EU has stated no access without free movement.

By access I mean access on existing terms as an internal market and not straight access as a country on the outside.