Bollocks to Brexit

[Rutabaga]

Gosh, how perceptive of you to understand that patronizing me might not go down well.

That is the reason why I felt it would not go down well.

[Sonic Budgie]

What makes you think I wish to accept it? Nevertheless, we are where we are, for reasons that go rather deeper than the way in which the referendum was conducted. I haven't gone back through all of this thread, but I don't recall any serious attempt to describe what a better EU looks like, nor why people might be persuaded to support it.

Remainers can carry on telling themselves that they're right, but the EU is just a convenient hook for populists, and until the underlying causes of their support are addressed, it's difficult to see how we move on as a country.

You appear to me to be suggesting that it is for remainers (or grown ups as I think you have called them) to reach out and compromise. I do not feel inclined to do this when every version of Brexit would seem to lead to a situation where the UK is poorer in all senses than we currently are. If I had a gun to my head then I would of course be more willing to accept the least worst option, but it does rather look as though you believe it is me that deserves to make that choice rather than the individuals that got us here in the first place.
I don't think many would disagree that the EU could do with some reforming and transparency, but leaving it will not stop it being a hook for populists, indeed I would suggest it will do the opposite. Nor will leaving address the underlying causes, I see it as the first steps onto a road that I do not want to see the UK treading. The only good that may come from it is that having seen what an utter disaster it is likely to be the populist vote will fall away in other countries, although as any failure is likely to be pointed squarely at the EU that may not be the case. I, however, would rather not have the UK become a future exam question in how not to tackle the rise of the right or deal with inequality in society.

[ransos]

You appear to me to be suggesting that it is for remainers (or grown ups as I think you have called them) to reach out and compromise. I do not feel inclined to do this when every version of Brexit would seem to lead to a situation where the UK is poorer in all senses than we currently are. If I had a gun to my head then I would of course be more willing to accept the least worst option, but it does rather look as though you believe it is me that deserves to make that choice rather than the individuals that got us here in the first place.

We voted to leave. So there's a pretty good argument for coming up with a compromise that respects the result whilst avoiding its most damaging effects.

It's at this point that Remainers tend to start talking about advisory referendums, or the antics of Nigel Farage. I think that's a mistake, just as it's a mistake to assume that Leave voters unknowingly chose to make themselves materially worse off.

I don't think many would disagree that the EU could do with some reforming and transparency, but leaving it will not stop it being a hook for populists, indeed I would suggest it will do the opposite. Nor will leaving address the underlying causes, I see it as the first steps onto a road that I do not want to see the UK treading. The only good that may come from it is that having seen what an utter disaster it is likely to be the populist vote will fall away in other countries, although as any failure is likely to be pointed squarely at the EU that may not be the case. I, however, would rather not have the UK become a future exam question in how not to tackle the rise of the right or deal with inequality in society.

So who is seriously arguing for EU reform? It seems to me that too often people want to brush it under the carpet, meanwhile populist leaders are telling a better story. If we stay, then the question of continued membership will arise repeatedly until we are able to change how we see ourselves.

[Regulator]

We voted to leave. So there's a pretty good argument for coming up with a compromise that respects the result whilst avoiding its most damaging effects.

It's at this point that Remainers tend to start talking about advisory referendums, or the antics of Nigel Farage. I think that's a mistake, just as it's a mistake to assume that Leave voters unknowingly chose to make themselves materially worse off.


So who is seriously arguing for EU reform? It seems to me that too often people want to brush it under the carpet, meanwhile populist leaders are telling a better story. If we stay, then the question of continued membership will arise repeatedly until we are able to change how we see ourselves.

The Green Party has been campaigning for EU engagement and reform for a number of years. The Lib Dems did for a while - but have now chosen to concentrating on getting the UK to get its own house in order before demanding that the EU does...

...something which has come more sharply into focus over the last couple of years.

[Regulator]

Not satisfied with disrupting St Pancras International...

Malicious homemade device found on Cambridgeshire railway track

[Sonic Budgie]

We voted to leave. So there's a pretty good argument for coming up with a compromise that respects the result whilst avoiding its most damaging effects.

It's at this point that Remainers tend to start talking about advisory referendums, or the antics of Nigel Farage. I think that's a mistake, just as it's a mistake to assume that Leave voters unknowingly chose to make themselves materially worse off.

You could, but I do think you could equally make the argument that if we are going to look at which option is the least damaging then there is only one way to look. Although, as I said above I would take the least damaging option but only as a last resort, when there is absolutely no option to stay.
I think it's a little difficult to talk about Brexit without Farage coming into it, equally difficult is any discussion concerning the remain group offering an olive branch without mentioning the tactics which have been employed throughout the process by the leave campaigns and campaigners.
I have to say that I do not believe anybody voted to be poorer. It is fair to say that for many this was not a Brexit vote nor an anti EU vote, but I do not accept that people voted knowing they would be worse off, though they may have voted thinking they couldn't be worse off.

So who is seriously arguing for EU reform? It seems to me that too often people want to brush it under the carpet, meanwhile populist leaders are telling a better story. If we stay, then the question of continued membership will arise repeatedly until we are able to change how we see ourselves.

Michel Barnier today? Populists will rather obviously always tell a better story. I suspect if we leave then renewing our membership will be the thing which repeatedly arises. The question may be how much damage will we allow the country to suffer before we go back and do we accept now that we will never have the terms which we currently enjoy again.

[ransos]

I have to say that I do not believe anybody voted to be poorer. It is fair to say that for many this was not a Brexit vote nor an anti EU vote, but I do not accept that people voted knowing they would be worse off, though they may have voted thinking they couldn't be worse off.

Just on this, I knowingly vote to make myself poorer at every general election. Why are you sure that Leave voters are incapable of making the same choice?

[Sonic Budgie]

Just on this, I knowingly vote to make myself poorer at every general election. Why are you sure that Leave voters are incapable of making the same choice?

I'm going to assume that the party you choose to support has in its manifesto that it will raise taxes in order to pay for public services etc? I would be interested in you pointing out where the leave campaigns said that the UK and its population would be worse off with any form of Brexit as opposed to dismissing it as project fear.

[ransos]

I'm going to assume that the party you choose to support has in its manifesto that it will raise taxes in order to pay for public services etc? I would be interested in you pointing out where the leave campaigns said that the UK and its population would be worse off with any form of Brexit as opposed to dismissing it as project fear.

Correct. Though I don't recall any party I have ever voted for saying that they were going to make the middle classes worse off.
A recurring theme of the remain campaign was indeed the financial perils of leaving. There's no reason to suppose that argument was dismissed by Leave voters. It could equally be true that they were aware of the risk but decided it was worth it because of their other priorities.

[Sonic Budgie]

Correct. Though I don't recall any party I have ever voted for saying that they were going to make the middle classes worse off.
A recurring theme of the remain campaign was indeed the financial perils of leaving. There's no reason to suppose that argument was dismissed by Leave voters. It could equally be true that they were aware of the risk but decided it was worth it because of their other priorities.

If they say they are going to raise taxes then it's pretty much a given. Leave may not have mentioned making people poorer either, but equally I can't recall too much talk about tariffs and trade barriers and a fall in the pound being mentioned by them.
I think we can likely agree that the remain campaign was sketchy to say the least, rather than concentrating on the positives of remaining they allowed the leave campaign to dictate the terms for debate and fell into attempting to explain the negatives of leaving. This enabled leave to dismiss all claims whilst simulataneously claiming 350m, having cake and eating it, they need us more than we need them and so on. I'm confident I could find numerous examples of the warnings from remain being dismissed, I'm less confident that you will find much honesty of the consequences from leave. As you said yourself, populist leaders tell a better story. You may be correct that leave voters were aware of the risks but that would mean accepting that they didn't believe the campaign they did support and did believe the campaign they didn't and that would seem to be vanishingly unlikley.

[Dunckel]

The one clear thing to come from today's developments is that if you are a Cabinet Minister then keeping your chauffeur driven Jag is much more important than your principals, though we knew that anyway. Also, the Prime Minister is too spineless to sack Ministers who fail to support her, though we knew that anyway.

[JohnToo]

That's not what many Europeans would say. As I understand it, the UK was welcomed by countries like NL and Sweden as a pragmatic counterpoint to the more ideological France. In the area of EU regulation I know best, it was the UK that drove change. The latest EU regulatory paper on conduct regulation of insurance (a profoundly unsexy but profoundly important topic), published last month, was obviously written by the UK regulator. And so on.

Footnote to this particular bit of the discussion: you have made this point to me before, and I should have remembered it and adapted my language accordingly, because I do partly agree with you. The UK has had beneficial influence in various technical areas. What I think we have never done very much is take a constructive role in the big picture of EU, and it is that failure that I think means we have (largely) undermined any argument that we need to stay in the EU in order to have influence on it, and, e.g, common market 2.0 is bad because we lose our say over the rules we would be subject to.

For the avoidance of doubt, I would prefer us to stay in the EU, I just think that that particular argument for staying isn't particularly strong.

[Rocky]

Some drugs cannot be stockpiled in the case of a No Deal - for example certain epilepsy medications.



It is claimed senior neurologists have been prevented from speaking out about this. If this is true, this cabinet (and the ERG) must rank as some of the most uncaring legislators we have ever had.

[LowlifeDes]

Would it be out of order to ask whether Theresa May will be putting herself right at the back of the queue for her diabetes drugs?

[Rutabaga]

I found some hope, and a little humour, in this anonymous article by a civil servant working on no-deal planning.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... mer-brexit