Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

5 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

 

Not at all. In that case, do Britons want Brexit (bearing in mind that Scots are Britons)?

[Boris]

1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

Not at all. In that case, do Britons want Brexit (bearing in mind that Scots are Britons)?

 

See my previous answers!

[Boris]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

So if I say Scots do not want independence at all you'd be happy.

 

 

 

In the context of the referendum result then yes, you would be correct.

[Francis Albert]

Just now, Boris said:

 

In the context of the referendum result then yes, you would be correct.

On the basis that scots do not want independence why the constant whinging anout the result of a uk vote in which the majority of  scots were in a minority? 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

On the basis that scots do not want independence why the constant whinging anout the result of a uk vote in which the majority of  scots were in a minority? 

 

It's only the SNP who are whinging about that. Works for their agenda.

 

Although good on *most* Scots for voting against Brexit because it feels like a thoroughly negative process.

[Boris]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

On the basis that scots do not want independence why the constant whinging anout the result of a uk vote in which the majority of  scots were in a minority? 

 

Because we are an eqqual partner in said Union but actually our voice counts for bugger all?

 

You may not want independence to see that.  You may not want independence to feel that the original Brexit referendum was flawed.  Had Wales, Scotland and N Ireland all voted leave but England voted remain, we would have remained.  Had Wales Scotland and N Ireland all voted remain but England voted leave, we would have left.

 

 

[Francis Albert]

10 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Because we are an eqqual partner in said Union but actually our voice counts for bugger all?

 

You may not want independence to see that.  You may not want independence to feel that the original Brexit referendum was flawed.  Had Wales, Scotland and N Ireland all voted leave but England voted remain, we would have remained.  Had Wales Scotland and N Ireland all voted remain but England voted leave, we would have left.

 

 

After 300 years you still think it is a union of equal partners?. In the sense that one Scottish vote on a uk issue is or should be equvalent to 10 english votes?

 

Edited January 30, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Boris]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

After 300 years you still think it is a union of equal partners?. In the sense that one Scottish vote on a uk issue is equvalent to 10 english votes?

 

 

We were told it was (a union of equals) in 2014.  We were also told that the only way Scotland would remain in the EU was by voting No.

 

I certainly don't think that votes should be weighted as you are suggesting, but if a union of equals, then on UK wide referenda, it's quite simple to say the four countries have one vote each, based on the results their electorate return.  Quasi federal, if you will.  That would be equality.

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

We were told it was (a union of equals) in 2014.  We were also told that the only way Scotland would remain in the EU was by voting No.

 

I certainly don't think that votes should be weighted as you are suggesting, but if a union of equals, then on UK wide referenda, it's quite simple to say the four countries have one vote each, based on the results their electorate return.  Quasi federal, if you will.  That would be equality.

It would certainly advance the independence cause. Not by scots but by english!

[Cade]

The English can't even accept Alternative Vote, never mind proportional representation or a fully federal UK.

 

 

[JamboX2]

6 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

One aspect where it does seem to be a low point for Britain is in the overseas reaction.

 

Countless people sayng "we thought you were the sensible, reliable ones, an example on how to do things".

 

However victory from the jaws of defeat might now be starting to be in sight. 

 

I think that's very optimistic on your last point. This deal she got - however bad - is the deal. In my view, parliamentarians and devolved administrations have been right to be furious about the lack of consultation and involvement. However, they should've forced her to concede on the future relationship side not the transition deal. 

 

Frankly she's stalling to protect her deal. She's driving us to the cliff edge in a hope that she can pass this deal. Failing which we all suffer big time.

 

I think you're point on foreign reaction is spot on. The question beyond Europe now must be "how can we honestly say we can do a deal with you on anything given your own inability to agree anything? And to reject anything your government agrees with us?"

 

Our standing globally has been knocked by very bad and very weak leadership.

[JamboX2]

6 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

One aspect where it does seem to be a low point for Britain is in the overseas reaction.

 

Countless people sayng "we thought you were the sensible, reliable ones, an example on how to do things".

 

However victory from the jaws of defeat might now be starting to be in sight. 

 

I think that's very optimistic on your last point. This deal she got - however bad - is the deal. In my view, parliamentarians and devolved administrations have been right to be furious about the lack of consultation and involvement. However, they should've forced her to concede on the future relationship side not the transition deal. 

 

Frankly she's stalling to protect her deal. She's driving us to the cliff edge in a hope that she can pass this deal. Failing which we all suffer big time.

 

I think you're point on foreign reaction is spot on. The question beyond Europe now must be "how can we honestly say we can do a deal with you on anything given your own inability to agree anything? And to reject anything your government agrees with us?"

 

Our standing globally has been knocked by very bad and very weak leadership.

[Boris]

13 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

It would certainly advance the independence cause. Not by scots but by english!

 

That would be a potential Brexit answer!

 

 

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I think that's very optimistic on your last point. This deal she got - however bad - is the deal. In my view, parliamentarians and devolved administrations have been right to be furious about the lack of consultation and involvement. However, they should've forced her to concede on the future relationship side not the transition deal. 

 

Frankly she's stalling to protect her deal. She's driving us to the cliff edge in a hope that she can pass this deal. Failing which we all suffer big time.

 

I think you're point on foreign reaction is spot on. The question beyond Europe now must be "how can we honestly say we can do a deal with you on anything given your own inability to agree anything? And to reject anything your government agrees with us?"

 

Our standing globally has been knocked by very bad and very weak leadership.

 

On the same point I think Scottish independence is closer. 

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

That would be a potential Brexit answer!

 

 

True

 

[JamboX2]

5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

In the post I replied to you simply stated that this shambles was "the biggest low point for the UK internationally since the American colonies became independent". You have now modified that to restrict the judgment to low points not entirely within the UK's control and making the rather large excision of the history of the British Empire, while absolving the UK for any responsibility for the start of and course of the two world wars.

 

 

The opposite. I said to things within our direct control. 

 

How did we start the two world wars? WW1 was created by a series of tensions in lands thousands of miles away no one had heard of until an Archduke was shot in a motor car. Was it our guarantee of polish independence which forced Hitler's hans? 

 

I've not absolved UK of any ills of empire. In fact I agree with you. 

 

You cannot escape nor obfuscate that this is - at the very least - a major diplomatic and national embarrasment entirely of our own control and design. And the last time we suffered such a loss of face was Suez. Which forced a rethink on signing the Treaty of Rome as we realised the limits of our power, influence and reassessed our relationship with certain allies. 

 

I fear much like Suez, this debacle will do so again and cause much more soul searching and damage in the years to come.

[JamboX2]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

On the same point I think Scottish independence is closer. 

 

Tend to agree. But that's not a solution too much as it duplicates a lot of the issues we've seen in the issues around Ireland on the mainland.

 

Sturgeon is right to be cautious. But she should be a lot more straight forward and say to her supporters and party that the outcome of Brexit will shape the future concept of an independent Scotland and have very real issues around how best Scotland and the UK would interact and how Scotland will interact with the EU. 

 

Imo, any indy Scotland will be in the euro from here on in. How well will the rules around finances there go with the yes movement as a whole? Imagine Scottish nationalists reacting to budget dictats from Mario Draghi... 

[Mikey1874]

7 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The opposite. I said to things within our direct control. 

 

How did we start the two world wars? WW1 was created by a series of tensions in lands thousands of miles away no one had heard of until an Archduke was shot in a motor car. Was it our guarantee of polish independence which forced Hitler's hans? 

 

I've not absolved UK of any ills of empire. In fact I agree with you. 

 

You cannot escape nor obfuscate that this is - at the very least - a major diplomatic and national embarrasment entirely of our own control and design. And the last time we suffered such a loss of face was Suez. Which forced a rethink on signing the Treaty of Rome as we realised the limits of our power, influence and reassessed our relationship with certain allies. 

 

I fear much like Suez, this debacle will do so again and cause much more soul searching and damage in the years to come.

 

I've seen people from all over the world including perhaps surprising places like Iran and Russia talk about their shock at Britain's good reputation for good government and being sensible trashed. 

 

I wouldn't under-estimate the damage to Britain's reputation and knock on effects in being able to get anything done with international partners and even enemies who at least (used to) respect Britain. 

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Tend to agree. But that's not a solution too much as it duplicates a lot of the issues we've seen in the issues around Ireland on the mainland.

 

Sturgeon is right to be cautious. But she should be a lot more straight forward and say to her supporters and party that the outcome of Brexit will shape the future concept of an independent Scotland and have very real issues around how best Scotland and the UK would interact and how Scotland will interact with the EU. 

 

Imo, any indy Scotland will be in the euro from here on in. How well will the rules around finances there go with the yes movement as a whole? Imagine Scottish nationalists reacting to budget dictats from Mario Draghi... 

 

Not a solution. But the soft No vote might just be moved enough by this shambles. 

[JamboX2]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

Not a solution. But the soft No vote might just be moved enough by this shambles. 

 

Agree. But that doesn't escape the issues I've mentioned. And before we jump into another unknown it requires serious thought: which appears lacking.

[Francis Albert]

24 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The opposite. I said to things within our direct control. 

 

How did we start the two world wars? WW1 was created by a series of tensions in lands thousands of miles away no one had heard of until an Archduke was shot in a motor car. Was it our guarantee of polish independence which forced Hitler's hans? 

 

I've not absolved UK of any ills of empire. In fact I agree with you. 

 

You cannot escape nor obfuscate that this is - at the very least - a major diplomatic and national embarrasment entirely of our own control and design. And the last time we suffered such a loss of face was Suez. Which forced a rethink on signing the Treaty of Rome as we realised the limits of our power, influence and reassessed our relationship with certain allies. 

 

I fear much like Suez, this debacle will do so again and cause much more soul searching and damage in the years to come.

Sorry yes a stray not in my post. Don't disagree much about the reformulation of yoour original post.

(Though of course i didn't suggest the uk started either world war)

 

Edited January 30, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Cade]

European Parliament ripping the pish out of Brexit right now.

Making some excellent points as per usual.

[The Mighty Thor]

20 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The opposite. I said to things within our direct control. 

 

How did we start the two world wars? WW1 was created by a series of tensions in lands thousands of miles away no one had heard of until an Archduke was shot in a motor car. Was it our guarantee of polish independence which forced Hitler's hans? 

 

I've not absolved UK of any ills of empire. In fact I agree with you. 

 

You cannot escape nor obfuscate that this is - at the very least - a major diplomatic and national embarrasment entirely of our own control and design. And the last time we suffered such a loss of face was Suez. Which forced a rethink on signing the Treaty of Rome as we realised the limits of our power, influence and reassessed our relationship with certain allies. 

 

I fear much like Suez, this debacle will do so again and cause much more soul searching and damage in the years to come.

There will be a justified reassessment of the U.K.s international standin once this debacle plays out to it's final conclusion. 

I think future UK governments may find that they are not held in the esteem with which they hold themselves. That may come as a bit of shock to the many who still believe the UK projects influence across the globe. 

[Mikey1874]

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

28 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

Probably on College Green at 6am, pistols at ten paces.  ?

[Boris]

40 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Who said it was a union of equals (other than politician sound bites) and what did that exactly mean? Where was stated that meant it was 4 countries voting on shit as single block entities? 

 

i read that as individual equality not of country equality to be honest. (Though no reference point)

 

I don’t think your second paragraphs is equality at all. Particulary in relation to referenda where you vote as a individual not to area/constituency/country. I find it a peculiar lens to take to be honest.

 

Amyway Brexit is bonkers

Och, I'm only stoking grievance! 

And I agree with your assessment of Brexit! 

[JudyJudyJudy]

19 hours ago, Jambo100 said:

The E U should shut the door on May.You are leaving so except our rules.Then we can watch as the jobs go and the Labour Party and the Tories are finished.We then become a Republic and get rid of that Royal scum and the Church of England ruling the roost.We become a country of one man one vote and no class..We must support the E U over the U K.

 

 

 

Agree 

[CJGJ]

5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

... a million scots voted for brexit

So now you want to ignore what Scotland voted for when it suits you

 

You really are it seems unaware of what you have posted earlier in this thread.....telling us all how the majority vote should be adhered to then ignoring it when it suits you .over 16 million voted to stay in the EU

 

Typical of just how we  got into this mess with lies, misinformation and rumour mongering

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

On the basis that scots do not want independence why the constant whinging anout the result of a uk vote in which the majority of  scots were in a minority? 

Majority of Scots, not the Scottish electorate, want independence and EU membership.

[JamboX2]

2 hours ago, The Mighty Thor said:

There will be a justified reassessment of the U.K.s international standin once this debacle plays out to it's final conclusion. 

I think future UK governments may find that they are not held in the esteem with which they hold themselves. That may come as a bit of shock to the many who still believe the UK projects influence across the globe. 

 

This may be no bad thing. The UK has punched above its weight and may well continue to do so.

 

This may - I hope - result in a rethink on what it is Britain can do well and offer. In my view that should be a greater focus on out international development commitments, which far out gun many of our fellow nations. 

 

I'd also say our soft influence, arts, culture etc, will remain strong. 

 

But Brexit is a mive which will result in less political standing globally. Canada and Australia are the models of our future global roles - imo.

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

It would certainly advance the independence cause. Not by scots but by english!

Aww! But your right, the English wouldn't put up with the shite the Scottish electorate puts up with.

Edited January 30, 2019 by ri Alban

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, CJGJ said:

So now you want to ignore what Scotland voted for when it suits you

 

You really are it seems unaware of what you have posted earlier in this thread.....telling us all how the majority vote should be adhered to then ignoring it when it suits you .over 16 million voted to stay in the EU

 

Typical of just how we  got into this mess with lies, misinformation and rumour mongering

It was a uk vote. If and when a majority in scotland votes for independence then independence should happen. Like the brexit vote  It is not a question of whether it suits me.

[coconut doug]

2 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

This may be no bad thing. The UK has punched above its weight and may well continue to do so.

 

This may - I hope - result in a rethink on what it is Britain can do well and offer. In my view that should be a greater focus on out international development commitments, which far out gun many of our fellow nations. 

 

I'd also say our soft influence, arts, culture etc, will remain strong. 

 

But Brexit is a mive which will result in less political standing globally. Canada and Australia are the models of our future global roles - imo.

he U.K. does not "punch above its weight". It has stood up to virtually nobody for 20 years. The U.K. habitually aligns itself and supports the worst regimes on the planet and most murderous savages on the planet. Whether that is Pohl pot, The Nazis in Ukraine, The White helmets (ISIS), Saudi Arabia, the torturers in Uzbekhistan or the organ harvesting, drug running criminals in Kosovo. Supporting exploitation is the default position of the U.K. and if we ever show any reluctance we are prodded and jump to the commands and wishes of the USA and Israel.

 

Our overseas aid produces virtually nothing of value and primarily exists to create propaganda and provide profit making opportunities for private interests.  

[manaliveits105]

The EU mouthpieces are now getting on my nerves - especially the oirish - if no renegotiations then they can feck aff and stuff the    divorce settlement give them Brussels sprout 

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

The EU mouthpieces are now getting on my nerves - especially the oirish - if no renegotiations then they can feck aff and stuff the    divorce settlement give them Brussels sprout 

 

[Ibrahim Tall]

8 hours ago, Cade said:

£190billion worth of assets moved to Dublin by Barclay's bank after the High Court gives them the go-ahead.

 

 

 

https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/barclays-prepares-to-shift-e190bn-of-uk-assets-to-ireland-20190130

 

“Banks have spent at least £1bn on their contingency plans, and are unwilling to backtrack on them, the executives said. Deutsche Bank is reportedly set to move €400bn worth of its UK-based assets to Frankfurt, while JPMorgan will move €200bn to the German city.

Royal Bank of Scotland said on December 6 that it would transfer assets that account for around 20% of the revenue of its investment bank to Amsterdam if the UK leaves the EU with no exit deal.”

 

 

Fair sum of money...

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

The EU mouthpieces are now getting on my nerves - especially the oirish - if no renegotiations then they can feck aff and stuff the    divorce settlement give them Brussels sprout 

 

 

[JamboX2]

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

he U.K. does not "punch above its weight". It has stood up to virtually nobody for 20 years. The U.K. habitually aligns itself and supports the worst regimes on the planet and most murderous savages on the planet. Whether that is Pohl pot, The Nazis in Ukraine, The White helmets (ISIS), Saudi Arabia, the torturers in Uzbekhistan or the organ harvesting, drug running criminals in Kosovo. Supporting exploitation is the default position of the U.K. and if we ever show any reluctance we are prodded and jump to the commands and wishes of the USA and Israel.

 

What regimes would you align with in the middle east? You can be friends with Israel as one of the region's sole functioning democracies or a variety of oligarchic and autocratic regimes. Surely its all about the overall good than not? 

 

I assume from your post you'd prefer we ignored Russian meddling in Ukraine or the actions of the Milosovic government in the 1990s - in Kosovo and Bosnia for example? Or his attempted invasions of Croatia and Slovenia after they declared independence from Yugoslavia? 

 

I'm still not wholly convinced the White Helmets are ISIS and I'm a bit lost on your Uzbek and Khmer Rouge points. I agree on the Saudis though.

 

Can I ask, has Britain done any good at all in your view? Do you think the soft power shown pre-Brexit in banning cluster munitions, combating FGM or the work taken in promotion of girls education in places it's not a norm? I mean these were efforts of Miliband and Hague as Foreign Secretaries. As was Hague's efforts in the Iran deal. No good in that? 

 

It's all very knee-jerk in your alignment of views, I.e. pro-whoever or whatever happens. Just trying to bottom it out.

 

Quote

 

Our overseas aid produces virtually nothing of value and primarily exists to create propaganda and provide profit making opportunities for private interests.  

 

Really? Surely if this was the case it would be national news? 

 

I mean I think using aid to further business interests is a breach of UN Development goals. 

Edited January 31, 2019 by JamboX2

[Ulysses]

9 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Really? Surely if this was the case it would be national news? 

 

The UK is one of the leading overseas development aid contributors in the world, something of which the country should be rightly proud and something I wish my own government would emulate.

 

Whether the UK gets the credit it deserves for that, on the world stage or among its own people, is another matter.

Edited January 31, 2019 by Ulysses

[JamboX2]

7 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

The UK is one of the leading overseas development aid contributors in the world, something of which the country should be rightly proud and something I wish my own government would emulate.

 

Whether the UK gets the credit it deserves for that, on the world stage or among its own people, is another matter.

 

Was more querying Coconut's point about it being a simple facilitator for private businesses to get into third world markets.

 

I agree with your point. 

 

My concern with Coconut's point is that 0.7% GDP is a lot spent since 1997 for little in the way of visible economic return if we are simply opening doors for business.

 

Which of course is the opposite purpose of aid.

Edited January 31, 2019 by JamboX2

[Ibrahim Tall]

7 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

 

I assume from your post you'd prefer we ignored Russian meddling in Ukraine or the actions of the Milosovic government in the 1990s - in Kosovo and Bosnia for example? Or his attempted invasions of Croatia and Slovenia after they declared independence from Yugoslavia? 

 

 

On this point, it was a civil war. There was no 'good' side, some Serbs did some pretty horrific atrocities but the Croats and Bosniaks were no angels either and committed plenty of "war crimes" themselves. Kosovo was the same.

 

[gashauskis9]

I’ve decided to step aside from my anti-Brexit rants for a day or two to allow me to become more informed and balanced.

 

Is there anyone on here in a more knowledgeable position than me who can give any examples of what the alternative arrangements might look like?  Just seems to me that not one single Tory who voted for the Brady amendment can answer the question when it’s posed to them.

[The Mighty Thor]

44 minutes ago, Gashauskis9 said:

I’ve decided to step aside from my anti-Brexit rants for a day or two to allow me to become more informed and balanced.

 

Is there anyone on here in a more knowledgeable position than me who can give any examples of what the alternative arrangements might look like?  Just seems to me that not one single Tory who voted for the Brady amendment can answer the question when it’s posed to them.

You'll be waiting a while!

 

It's where the moonbeams and unicorns come from. There is no available technological solution otherwise they'd have nailed it by now. It's why the whole thing is a ruse to run the clock down to the inevitable no deal, that many think was the plan all along, and blame the Europeans. 

Meanwhile the MSM go along with it and cheerlead the whole thing right off the cliff edge. 

[Francis Albert]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

Edited January 31, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Don Dan]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

 

Error 404 FA 

[Francis Albert]

I am hopeless at links. Google "bbc news good friday agreement border" for an analysis by the bbc yesterday of what the GFA says about the border.

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Gashauskis9 said:

I’ve decided to step aside from my anti-Brexit rants for a day or two to allow me to become more informed and balanced.

 

Is there anyone on here in a more knowledgeable position than me who can give any examples of what the alternative arrangements might look like?  Just seems to me that not one single Tory who voted for the Brady amendment can answer the question when it’s posed to them.

 

The EU is holding most of the cards. The Brexiteers want complete freedom to make new trade deals etc. 

 

So inbetween May has tried to build a compromise. Unfortunately the EU trump card or the main problem is the Irish land border. 

 

Also despite the vote won on Tuesday May cannot easily satisfy everyone in the Tory party.

 

So to answer your question but based on the above is some sort of customs union that immediately solves the Irish border problem (because there is enough alignment not to need one).

 

Labour's position. A soft Brexit which is what a majority of MPs want. And maybe the  only way May can get any deal agreed. 

 

Not without complications though. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

11 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I am hopeless at links. Google "bbc news good friday agreement border" for an analysis by the bbc yesterday of what the GFA says about the border.

 

Hope this one works.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

Edited January 31, 2019 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Don Dan]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

 

Nano second to slow ?

Edited January 31, 2019 by Dannie Boy

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Hope this one works.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

Thanks (and Danny Boy)