Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

azda

So, Brexit....What's happening?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Might be something to do with the fact that they are net beneficiaries, rather than net contributors.  

When I spoke of regional grants to the poorest areas, I wasn't speaking of member states, but regions within those states - Britain gets its fair share of handouts from the EU.

Greece's troubles were precipitated by the worldwide crash in 2008.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd love to know is what Corbyn would do any different if there were an election and he got into No 10. The problem would still be there, and as he himself has already acknowledged this afternoon, the deal on offer is non negotiable as far as the EU are concerned. The government might change, but Brexit would not have gone away. 

Quite frankly, I'd take the deal, and I also stand and applaud May for the resilient and determined manner she has stood up to the non stop brickbats from around her - both sides - which quite honestly very few of those who are chucking them would be able to take if it was them. She's shown exceptional character in my opinion. Most would have folded and resigned by now.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the question of Brexit for the moment, I think May is a very unconvincing Prime Minister. She campaigned so badly in the last election and managed to lose her majority  against a much troubled Labour Party. Then she spent days talking about "strength and stability" with a straight face even though she messed up big time. She appeared less than sincere then. If I remember correctly, it took her more than a week after the election before she had the courage to apologise to the Tory MPs that have lost their sits. Her government was found in contempt of Parliament. She said the vote will definitely go ahead  just yesterday and has decided to cancel it today after leaking her decision to the press first. She said the deal was non negotiable yesterday but is saying that she will renegotiable with Brussels today. How can she expect people to trust her? I really think it is better off if she had folded two years ago. 

What are the alternatives? I dread to think. 

 

Edited by Sword
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The newsagent round the corner is quite a nice guy. He'd probably do ok. As for the politicians, forget them. Party politics always trumps consensus.

Ultimately May was wrong to allow the inclusion of the backstop. From the minute it was mooted, it was clearly an affront to our sovereignty as I pointed out in a letter to the FT at the time. I applauded the DUP then, and still think they are right to stand their ground. If the backstop wasn't there I think it would have been passed in the Commons on a free vote, whether I agree with the document or not.

Meanwhile, the two Corbyns must be having a right old ding-dong. For one side of him the 29th March can't come quickly enough, whilst his other side panders to his party clinging to an illusion that the EU will somehow give him much better terms whilst still leaving the EU.

As for the Lib Dems, they only seem to feel confident when closely collaborating with their ideological masters and as always support all things with Euro in the title. Eurotrash could be due for a rerun if they get to be in charge of programming. Hooray.

Edited by Rob
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Ultimately May was wrong to allow the inclusion of the backstop.

I am rather inclined to think that May would have allowed almost anything to get some sort of deal. I think she is too proud to go to parliament and admit that two years of negotiation have resulted in nothing. That scenario would certainly require her resignation and she would probably hate that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rob said:

Ultimately May was wrong to allow the inclusion of the backstop. From the minute it was mooted, it was clearly an affront to our sovereignty as I pointed out in a letter to the FT at the time. I applauded the DUP then, and still think they are right to stand their ground. If the backstop wasn't there I think it would have been passed in the Commons on a free vote, whether I agree with the document or not.

The so-called backstop is absolutely essential. Any threat to the Good Friday Agreement is utterly unthinkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing is set in stone. People still get killed because they are on the wrong side of the religious divide, but it has to be born in mind that the world has moved on a long way in the 50 years since the troubles started. Within a few years of the start, both Ireland and this country signed up to membership of an organisation which dictates terms to its members, in theory negating any requirement for a united Ireland. With anyone able to live in any member state, with an outside possibility of political union resulting in a single state, the concept of fighting for a united Ireland rings hollow.

Granted the agreement was signed 20 years ago and has lasted, but that also means a generation has grown up not living in a state of perpetual violence. Paramiltary and criminal activities go hand in hand, but the murder rate in London is now higher than Northern Ireland's, such has been the reduction in violence.

The right of Irish citizens to travel freely between our two countries and live here predates the EU and is intended to continue, so anyone looking to achieve a united Ireland in the context of EU supremacy really needs to look at what they expect in practical terms. With EU law overriding national laws, the nation state is effectively defunct for members. You only have to look at the shower in Westminster to see that there are no natural leaders, such is the level of dependency on Brussels to do our thinking.

The EU says the backstop is their insurance policy, but given the terms, it is most beneficial to them as the one that ensures we will keep the Brussels trough fed for years to come. Anything that means our leaving the EU at their convenience is subservience whichever way you look at it. Rees-Mogg's statement of us as a future vassal state is entirely appropriate.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sword said:

I am rather inclined to think that May would have allowed almost anything to get some sort of deal.

She is clearly duplicitous, she says one thing and does the opposite.  "No deal is better than a bad deal" was soon replaced with "Any deal is better than no deal".

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

She is clearly duplicitous, she says one thing and does the opposite.  "No deal is better than a bad deal" was soon replaced with "Any deal is better than no deal".

You're overlooking one very obvious point though. She doesn't consider the deal to be a bad one. Not perfect, for sure. But the best obtainable short of the WTO road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Not perfect, for sure. But the best obtainable short of the WTO road. 

Which is why taking the WTO option is what we should do.  Some short term pain for long term gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched the BBC Business news this morning, reported that the general feeling between Business leaders is that even a No Deal Brexit would be considered more favorable than a Momentum Labour Government, both would see businesses exit to other shores and shares/£ fall in value, the latter causing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Nick said:

Which is why taking the WTO option is what we should do.  Some short term pain for long term gain.

Channel 4 News interviewed an economist on this, who said that leaving the Single Market and going WTO was the equivalent of going from the Premier League down to League Two in one season.

9 hours ago, Rob said:

The EU says the backstop is their insurance policy, but given the terms, it is most beneficial to them as the one that ensures we will keep the Brussels trough fed for years to come. Anything that means our leaving the EU at their convenience is subservience whichever way you look at it. Rees-Mogg's statement of us as a future vassal state is entirely appropriate.

I'm sorry Rob, but up until now I'd thought you argued coherently about Brexit, but what you say there is nonsense. There is no 'Brussels trough' except in the minds of Brexiters. Yes, there are "jobs for the boys" (usually ex-politicians) but that's hardly unique to the EU - it exists worldwide and we ordinary folk really  don't like it, but it hardly represents more than a tiny fraction of what the EU is about. As for 'vassal state', that again is a Brexiter phrase that has no foundation in reality: we make our own laws, the one exception being EU regulations which are mostly to do with food agriculture and fisheries, standards for drugs and medicines, environmental matters, workers rights, etc. Germany, France, Italy, Ireland, Spain (just for starters) would never submit to being vassals, so why do Brexiters arouse the passions of voters by using that phrase of a future Britain? And they accuse Remainers of 'Project Fear'!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All politicians have a trough from which they feed and Brussels is no exception. Whether we are talking about duckponds in the UK or the ludicrously generous expenses of the European Parliament claimed for travel, not to mention the farce that is the monthly relocation from Brussels to Strasbourg, all are taking the taxpayer for a ride. Be a failed politician in your own country and Brussels will ride to the rescue with cozy package worth multiples of what they we earning at home. Snouts in troughs isn't restricted to politicians as industry and finance has proven time and again, but politicians are effectively employed by the taxpayer, who deserves better.

As long as the terms of the backstop require the EU's permission to leave, they can extract as much as they want from us. As it stands we have no bargaining power. If we say we want to leave then they will wave their copy of the agreement and say it needs our agreement. All this bodes ill for the future negotiations. With 27 nations each looking for their Brexit bonus, and this country having no guaranteed exit, it is well nigh impossible to argue that we won't be subservient to whatever they demand. They might give way on one or two things such as Gibraltar because that is covered by an existing treaty and nobody in Europe wants to unwind what is essentially a stable stalemate at the risk of opening other wounds, but it would still leave us exposed to the demands of the other 25 who will be looking to gain maximum access to our markets. Not good.

The only outcome will be taking directions from Brussels as they so decide.

Edited by Rob
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Rob makes a very good point, remember one small Provence, Wallonia in Belgium, held up the Canadian deal.

We could have France veto until Fisheries are agreed to reflect current quota, Spain until we agree to talks regarding sovereignty Gibraltar to highlight a couple

Share this post


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

Which is why taking the WTO option is what we should do.  Some short term pain for long term gain.

...and it would be considerable short term pain. Probably something like an immediate 15% hike in food prices, and the M20 turned into a lorry park.

But if it avoids a Corbyn government, then so be it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

...and it would be considerable short term pain. Probably something like an immediate 15% hike in food prices, and the M20 turned into a lorry park.

But if it avoids a Corbyn government, then so be it.

I don't think prices would go up that much.  Even Carney only said 5-10% and that was probably exaggerated.

https://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Article/2018/12/05/Food-prices-at-risk-of-rising

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rob said:

As long as the terms of the backstop require the EU's permission to leave, they can extract as much as they want from us. As it stands we have no bargaining power. If we say we want to leave then they will wave their copy of the agreement and say it needs our agreement. All this bodes ill for the future negotiations. With 27 nations each looking for their Brexit bonus, and this country having no guaranteed exit, it is well nigh impossible to argue that we won't be subservient to whatever they demand. They might give way on one or two things such as Gibraltar because that is covered by an existing treaty and nobody in Europe wants to unwind what is essentially a stable stalemate at the risk of opening other wounds, but it would still leave us exposed to the demands of the other 25 who will be looking to gain maximum access to our markets. Not good.

That's a distortion of the actual real-world situation. NEITHER side wants the backstop to be invoked, as both sides want a good deal out of Brexit; if that happens it will include some kind of customs union which will preclude a border in Ireland.

But IF - and I do mean if - that doesn't happen, then the EU has no alternative but to protect the interests of a member state (Eire) by invoking the backstop for as long as it's necessary. It's not about having the UK over a barrel, it's about not seeing Eire disadvantaged. If it was the other way about, and Eire was leaving and we were staying, don't you think the EU would do exactly the same thing, but this time in relation to our interests?

The terms of the backstop are NOT about leaving the EU, they're about how long the backstop stays in place. Article 50 has been invoked - although it can be withdrawn, only we can do that, the EU can't do it or insist we remain. What the EU can do is to insist that the backstop cannot be unilaterally removed by the UK if it means a border in Ireland. That's why the DUP is so spooked - it could mean N Ireland remaining effectively in the EU unless or until a deal is reached that precludes a border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'd like to see now is May resigning and one of her critics facing the EU brick wall themselves - see how they get on. They're full of what May has done wrong, but have said zero about how they would go about trying to re-negotiate, nor has one of them said a single word about the EU's refusal to alter the deal. 

Not sure if they think they've got some sort of magic wand which will change things.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

You're overlooking one very obvious point though. She doesn't consider the deal to be a bad one. Not perfect, for sure. But the best obtainable short of the WTO road. 

Problem is, she doesn't always, often mean what she says. "Strength and Stability" for instance. I think she might would just say any deal she obtained to be good. My faith in her is short in supply right now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

What I'd like to see now is May resigning and one of her critics facing the EU brick wall themselves - see how they get on. They're full of what May has done wrong, but have said zero about how they would go about trying to re-negotiate, nor has one of them said a single word about the EU's refusal to alter the deal. 

Not sure if they think they've got some sort of magic wand which will change things.

 

This probably the reason nobody has challenged her leadership and why there hasn't been a vote of no confidence, who would want to take over at this moment in time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

What I'd like to see now is May resigning and one of her critics facing the EU brick wall themselves - see how they get on. They're full of what May has done wrong, but have said zero about how they would go about trying to re-negotiate, nor has one of them said a single word about the EU's refusal to alter the deal. 

Not sure if they think they've got some sort of magic wand which will change things.

Most people would agree that May had an incredibly rotten task. It is possible that no one could have got us a good (i.e. better than current) deal. There is however no doubt that she had undermined her negotiating position by losing her majority in parliament when she had a good chance to increase it substantially. But if she fail to get a deal through parliament before the deadline, then she must resign as she has failed. I think a prime minister can only justify keeping his or her position by results. It is not enough to say "I have done my best".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Chingford said:

This probably the reason nobody has challenged her leadership and why there hasn't been a vote of no confidence, who would want to take over at this moment in time

Poisoned chalice.

Share this post


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

This probably the reason nobody has challenged her leadership and why there hasn't been a vote of no confidence, who would want to take over at this moment in time

Someone needs to. From Australia you are looking like a weak country being pushed around by the EU mainly due to incompetent leadership by May who says one thing and then proceeds to do something else. When May said Brexit means Brexit her real agenda was staying in the EU at any cost. One thing that is obvious is the border between the UK and the Irish Republic is the business of the two countries NOT the EU. As for the divorce bill 29 B. Euros for  what not even a trade deal, no guarantee of leaving and no input into the EU laws after "Brexit". The best deal possible? All you have is the crumbs off the table. Shame on you. I thought the UK had some pride.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

From Australia you are looking like a weak country being pushed around by the EU mainly due to incompetent leadership by May who says one thing and then proceeds to do something else.

The view from Australia seems pretty accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×