woodview Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 32 minutes ago, L00b said: I did not comment about that particular point. But since you seem to be asking: the argument that the leaflet implies leaving the CU (and/or SM) is wrong, because of those few words at the end "with a say". At the most, the leaflet implies that the UK would cease to have a say (no more MEPs nor Commissioner), not that it would exit the CU/SM wholesale. Government info during referendum: If the UK voted to leave the EU, we would lose access to trade agreements with more than 50 countries outside the EU. The UK would seek to renegotiate these deals, but this would take years These trade agreements are available within the CU. Does this statement imply leaving the EU also means leaving the EU? It was probably purposely not clear, as it helps with the general scaremongering tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobinfoot Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, I1L2T3 said: It asked exactly that. It asked should the U.K. be a member of the EU or should it leave the EU we can stop being a member of the EU but stay in a CU. That outcome is entirely compatible with the question asked Can we stay in a CU and make our own trade deals? And can we stay in a CU and not be bound by EU rules ? If the answer is yes then it could work if not then it's a non starter. Edited January 22, 2019 by hobinfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
convert Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 10 minutes ago, ez8004 said: Are you intellectually challenged? What was he supposed to do? Do nothing and let the economy tank and then sit back and say “I told you so”? He didn’t and did all he could to effectively prove himself wrong. Do you know why? Because that is what his job actually is for. To keep the U.K. economy in check and do everything they can to prevent serious shocks. Not at all, He was supposed to do his job, and provide a balanced overview, not act as a cheerleader for project fear. I thought the bank was there to support the Government policy for the economy, not to have sole responsibility for it , as you imply. Under the new regime, the Treasury said the joint objectives of the Bank of England would be "to maintain price stability" and "support the economic policy of [the government], including its objectives for growth and employment". Source https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/mar/20/bank-of-england-new-remit-george-osborne-budget If anyone deserves thanks, it's the Chancellor and the Government, and the companies and workers of the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 hour ago, woodview said: Thanks for letting me know. We were talking about the assertion that there was no need to. I never once said that Tecnically parliament didn’t have to. Morally it did have to. And it did. I understand why that happened. I don’t understand why, now that we have more info on possible forms of Brexit and criminality during the referendum campaigns, that Parliament should be railroaded into damaging the country on a point of principle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodview Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 minute ago, I1L2T3 said: I never once said that Tecnically parliament didn’t have to. Morally it did have to. And it did. I understand why that happened. I don’t understand why, now that we have more info on possible forms of Brexit and criminality during the referendum campaigns, that Parliament should be railroaded into damaging the country on a point of principle So, do you think they should just can the idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, woodview said: So, do you think they should just can the idea? There’s no easy answer. A50 extension is probably best, but that is fraught with dangers as well. We missed the boat for the most obvious interim solution, if realistic enough to accept that this could not be sorted out in one bound, and that was EEA/EFTA That would have allowed for increasing managed divergence later, but would have needed political acceptance that this needs to be a 10-20 year project and not a two year project I think once again we have suffered due to Tory party management, with the overriding aim to have this done and dusted in one parliament before a GE, which clearly now looks impossible Edited January 22, 2019 by I1L2T3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJRB Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 9 minutes ago, woodview said: So, do you think they should just can the idea? Eventually there will be two options available to us if you discount a no deal Brexit which suits nobody of sound mind. A negotiated deal,or retain the status quo. I believe that this should be the subject of a referendum as a democratic right. I could live with whatever outcome in the knowledge that due consideration has been given to a very important issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 minute ago, RJRB said: Eventually there will be two options available to us if you discount a no deal Brexit which suits nobody of sound mind. A negotiated deal,or retain the status quo. I believe that this should be the subject of a referendum as a democratic right. I could live with whatever outcome in the knowledge that due consideration has been given to a very important issue. It’s basically accept or reject the deal A lot of remainers are reasonable. There’s enough of us who would accept a reasonable compromise retaining close ties while we continue to find our way The key for me is being able to return later on good terms if we need to There has to be a halfway house with this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolyhead Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) On 14/01/2019 at 18:44, woodview said: were Why? If we don't leave, and just go back in the EU as it was previously, will the dis-quiet that caused a Leave vote last time just disappear? They could be assumed to cancel each other out so that it would be as if we had never voted in the first place. Perhaps this would mean that we would automatically be back in the dear old EU? On 14/01/2019 at 19:18, ez8004 said: You still think a no deal is possible? How very naive you are. If we leave the EU could someone tell me what the northern Ireland situation would be regarding export duty if there were no customs border there. How and where would it be paid? Edited January 22, 2019 by woolyhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
convert Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 19 minutes ago, woolyhead said: They could be assumed to cancel each other out so that it would be as if we had never voted in the first place. Perhaps this would mean that we would automatically be back in the dear old EU? If we leave the EU could someone tell me what the northern Ireland situation would be regarding export duty if there were no customs border there. How and where would it be paid? Where is the invoice for the good converted from £ to Euro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts