Jump to content

The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting


Recommended Posts

Tom Watson interviewed on Andrew Marr this morning was as clueless as Corbyn was last week, when asked what deal Labour could get with the EU that would be any better than Teresa Mayhem's Chequers deal. Like Corbyn, he had no answer.

 

I get the feeling that Labour's policy is to just let Brexit go ahead, then blame the Tories when the **** hits the fan.

 

Good luck with that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Watson interviewed on Andrew Marr this morning was as clueless as Corbyn was last week, when asked what deal Labour could get with the EU that would be any better than Teresa Mayhem's Chequers deal. Like Corbyn, he had no answer.

 

I get the feeling that Labour's policy is to just let Brexit go ahead, then blame the Tories when the **** hits the fan.

 

You cannot explain about a deal that has not been reached; Labour want a closer deal and will be happier with more regulation, the Tories want a looser deal, the deal will be whatever the other 27 countries will accept.

 

We have no idea what those 27 countries will accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disadvantage that the Brexiteers have is it's hard to argue for what hasn't yet happened. People are understandably spooked by taking a step into the unknown.

 

Even looking at the arrangements other counties have with the EU, like Canada, doesn't answer the questions, as the British deal will be different again.

 

The fact remains, the British governments over the years have had an easy ride and failed miserably in fighting our corner in EU negotiations. Preferring instead, to roll over and then blame the EU for our problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disadvantage that the Brexiteers have is it's hard to argue for what hasn't yet happened. People are understandably spooked by taking a step into the unknown.

 

Even looking at the arrangements other counties have with the EU, like Canada, doesn't answer the questions, as the British deal will be different again.

 

The fact remains, the British governments over the years have had an easy ride and failed miserably in fighting our corner in EU negotiations. Preferring instead, to roll over and then blame the EU for our problems.

 

Just stop saying this which are opinions that are either blatantly incorrect or you’re just lying.

 

It has already been established as fact that the U.K. has had 98% of legislation it wanted go through. So what exactly do you have to prove that we get rolled over most of the time like you imply. You have nothing absolutely nothing to support your assertions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disadvantage that the Brexiteers have is it's hard to argue for what hasn't yet happened. People are understandably spooked by taking a step into the unknown.

 

Even looking at the arrangements other counties have with the EU, like Canada, doesn't answer the questions, as the British deal will be different again.

 

The fact remains, the British governments over the years have had an easy ride and failed miserably in fighting our corner in EU negotiations. Preferring instead, to roll over and then blame the EU for our problems.

 

That was heading to be possibly the most deluded post you've ever written but you saved it with the last sentence, which is bang on and most brexiteers ignore. But what particular corner should the UK government have fought for? What haven't we got but should have got from the EU. We've had a veto, a rebate - all sorts of good stuff. What more should we have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Watson interviewed on Andrew Marr this morning was as clueless as Corbyn was last week, when asked what deal Labour could get with the EU that would be any better than Teresa Mayhem's Chequers deal. Like Corbyn, he had no answer.

 

I get the feeling that Labour's policy is to just let Brexit go ahead, then blame the Tories when the **** hits the fan.

 

Good luck with that!

 

That would be an utterly disastrous policy

 

They will do something like officially endorse a peoples vote before March to get themselves off the hook for the aftermath. But after two years of very little serious opposition it’ll not be enough.

 

This is going to sink Labour too. And they 100% deserve everything that is coming

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2018 at 13:32 ----------

 

The disadvantage that the Brexiteers have is it's hard to argue for what hasn't yet happened. People are understandably spooked by taking a step into the unknown.

 

Even looking at the arrangements other counties have with the EU, like Canada, doesn't answer the questions, as the British deal will be different again.

 

The fact remains, the British governments over the years have had an easy ride and failed miserably in fighting our corner in EU negotiations. Preferring instead, to roll over and then blame the EU for our problems.

 

You do realise that the U.K. had successfully fought for and had the best deal of any EU/EEA/EFTA member?

 

You understand that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be an utterly disastrous policy

 

They will do something like officially endorse a peoples vote before March to get themselves off the hook for the aftermath. But after two years of very little serious opposition it’ll not be enough.

 

This is going to sink Labour too. And they 100% deserve everything that is coming

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2018 at 13:32 ----------

 

 

You do realise that the U.K. had successfully fought for and had the best deal of any EU/EEA/EFTA member?

 

You understand that?

 

Really... Would you care to be more specific. Not just paper agreements /legislation, but actual on the ground actions. Your answer might like to reference a few things like the cod war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really... Would you care to be more specific. Not just paper agreements /legislation, but actual on the ground actions. Your answer might like to reference a few things like the cod war.

 

No, hold on aminute, YOU were the one who said we should have had more and/or a better deal without specifying what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, hold on aminute, YOU were the one who said we should have had more and/or a better deal without specifying what.

 

I'm giving I1L2T3 a chance to enlighten me.

 

Seriously, I am interested in some facts, rather than non-specific claims. Something that has been sadly lacking on both sides of the argument. Maybe if we'd had a few more concrete examples of how we have benefitted from membership the vote might have gone the other way.

 

For years (before the referendum, remember then?) all we seemed to hear about the EU was negative stuff. And let's face it, we didn't hear a lot, - we've always been more interested in what was going on in America than what was going on in Brussels.

 

Hence the growing clamour for a referendum in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.