British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

ijuin
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby ijuin » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:09 pm UTC

elasto wrote:I'd rather have BoJo than Trump to be fair, but the chances of a No Deal Brexit just went up still further.

I’d rather have BoJo than Trump, and I’m an American. Any chance we can repeal that Declaration of Independence?

User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:11 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Plasma_Wolf » Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:39 am UTC

It doesn't matter who's in charge really. Both BoJo and Trump (who we should babe DoTr) are being used by others for their own ulterior motives. For DoTr the long term political ratification is the judicial system being skewed in the favour of religious conservative republicans. For BoJo it's further control to the elites in the country and making sure they stent accountable for anything they do (in the US it's been that way for years already).

Also, go watch The Great Hack on Netflix. There is no better way to understand what happened to democracy, why Brexit and Trump happened, and lots of other horrible things in the world. On top of that, this may just be the beginning.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4896
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby HES » Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:09 am UTC

Plasma_Wolf wrote:(who we should babe DoTr)

Short for Dotard?
He/Him/His Image

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:39 am UTC

The government is now "working on the assumption" of a no-deal Brexit, Michael Gove has said.

[...]

He added he hoped EU leaders might yet open up to the idea of striking a new deal, "but we must operate on the assumption that they will not. While we are optimistic about the future, we are realistic about the need to plan for every eventuality."

Mr Gove highlighted a major flaw of Mrs May's deal as the Irish backstop plan - a measure designed to prevent the introduction of a hard border on the island of Ireland. So far the backstop has proved a sticking point in the Brexit negotiations.

A no-deal Brexit would mean the UK leaving the EU and cutting ties immediately, with no agreement in place. The UK would follow World Trade Organization rules if it wanted to trade with the EU and other countries, while also trying to negotiate free-trade deals.

But with Britain outside the EU, there could be physical checkpoints to monitor people and goods crossing in and out of the UK - something ruled out by the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland.

I have a question if anyone here can answer: What happens in Ireland in the event of No Deal? I imagine neither side will choose to impose a hard border but there'll be enormous tension there, because there will be people and goods crossing back and forth all the time despite this being technically illegal.

Personally I think it's despicable that Ireland is the red line that the Tories can't stomach; Brinkmanship that could result in The Troubles returning strikes me as sick in the same way as when a divorcing couple use the children as a weapon.

It's just one more sign that Brexiteers can't be grown up about this. It's all just 'sovereignty!' 'sovereignty!' and damn the real-world consequences...

Still, the end result of all this will probably be some meaningless rewriting of May's agreement so that all sides end up saving face. That's assuming that Boris is actually pragmatic despite all the bluster (he did vote for May's agreement in the end after all) and not the nutcase that is his chosen persona...

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Zamfir » Mon Jul 29, 2019 7:59 am UTC

Their official plans are here. It's thin gruel.

https://www.dfa.ie/brexit/getting-irela ... ctionplan/

Look at page 20
Spoiler:
Northern Ireland and North-South
Relations
The Government has consistently highlighted the risks that Brexit poses for Northern Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement, and repeatedly underlined that a no deal Brexit is in no one’s interests, least of all for the people of
Northern Ireland who will be most affected.
The Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland contained within the Withdrawal Agreement protects the Good Friday Agreement and the gains of the peace process in all its parts by:
 Respecting fully the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent as guaranteed by the Good Friday Agreement;
 Guaranteeing, through a backstop mechanism, that there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland; underpinning continuing North-South cooperation and
protecting the all island economy, including by maintaining the Single Electricity Market;
 Making provision for the maintenance of the Common Travel Area, ensuring that the current bilateral arrangements can continue whereby Irish and British citizens
can live, work, study and access healthcare, social security and public services
in each jurisdiction;
 Ensuring no diminution of rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity as set
out in the Good Friday Agreement;
 Confirming that people in Northern Ireland will continue to enjoy their rights as
EU citizens.
Many of the actions listed within this plan are cross-cutting and include those that the
Government can take to protect the Good Friday Agreement and the Common Travel
Area, and mitigate as much as possible against the worst effects of a no deal Brexit on
North-South cooperation.
However, it will not be possible to fully mitigate many of the risks associated with a no
deal Brexit.
Political, Security and Societal Impacts
The consequences of a no deal Brexit for the political process in Northern Ireland could
be very damaging.
If the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement were operating at that point, it would be
a very significant test of their resilience. Should the current talks process not have
resulted by that point in the restoration to operation of the Good Friday Agreement
institutions, a no deal Brexit would also present an even more difficult environment for
political talks aimed at restoring the operation of the NI Assembly and Executive and the
North-South Ministerial Council. The further delay, following an already extended period
without the institutions, would have significant implications for wider public confidence.
A no deal Brexit risks significantly undermining wider community relations and political
stability in Northern Ireland, with potential related security concerns.
It could be expected that calls for a border poll to be held would increase in such a
scenario. This could also have implications for the stability of the institutions if they are
in place, or the process to restore them to operation.
The longer the uncertainty of a no deal scenario persists, the more political and
community relationships in Northern Ireland would be tested.
Uncertainty around a physical border on the island could also be expected to become a
focus for dissident republican paramilitary recruitment and activity. Garda and PSNI
authorities have said publicly that any border infrastructure or personnel would become
targets for dissident republican paramilitaries and require police or other protection.
A no deal Brexit also has the potential to become a focus for increased loyalist
paramilitary recruitment and activity, including in response to dissident republican
paramilitary actions and an increased public focus on a border poll.
If the institutions were not in place at the time of a no deal Brexit, there is a risk that the
UK Government might initiate a move to Direct Rule in Northern Ireland as a response
to managing the transition to new arrangements in the timeframe involved.
The central priority of the Government in this regard is to work urgently and in
partnership with the UK Government to support the restoration of the institutions of the
Good Friday Agreement to full operation on a more sustainable basis, and to address
key issues of division between the main parties that have affected partnership
government in Northern Ireland. Having the institutions working on behalf of all the
people of Northern Ireland would be crucial in managing the impacts of any Brexit
scenario on the island.
Economic Impacts
In the past months, numerous public interventions have been made, which underline
how the prospect of operating outside the EU with no deal would be extremely serious
for the businesses, people and economy of Northern Ireland.
Most recently a report published by the Northern Ireland Department of the Economy
states that micro and small enterprises in Northern Ireland will be the most adversely
affected in the event of a no deal Brexit, with the agri-food sector especially vulnerable.
This scenario would also have the gravest consequences for cross-border trade, which
is so significant to the Northern Ireland economy, and thus for the all-island economy,
the protection of which is a major priority for this Government.
This report and other information, such as the letter from the Head of the Northern
Ireland Civil Service to political parties in Northern Ireland in March, makes clear that a
no deal Brexit could have a profound and long-lasting impact on society and that,
despite the considerable amount of mitigation work that has been undertaken to date
across departments in Northern Ireland, there are considerable and unavoidable
residual risks to the local economy that cannot be mitigated. Such risks include the
introduction of EU tariffs and the challenges for businesses to adjust to new economic
and trading realities.
The commitment of the Government throughout the Brexit process to preventing the re-
emergence of a hard border on the island of Ireland remains of the highest priority. The
backstop is the only viable solution on the table that avoids a hard border, including
physical infrastructure and related checks and controls, preserves the all-island
economy and fully protects the Good Friday Agreement, as well the integrity of the EU
Single Market and Ireland’s place in it.
Throughout this process, Ireland and the EU have been at one. The EU has been clear
that it is determined to do all it can, deal or no deal, to avoid a hard border on the island
of Ireland and to protect the peace process.
Since earlier this year, there has been a process of engagement between Ireland and
the European Commission on how to achieve, in a no deal scenario, our shared twin
objectives of protecting the integrity of the Single Market and Ireland’s place in it and
avoiding any physical infrastructure on the island of Ireland.
Without the Withdrawal Agreement and the backstop, there are no easy answers. Both
the EU and the UK Government agree that no one has yet come up with any
alternatives that meet the same objectives as the Withdrawal Agreement. There should
be no illusion – a no deal Brexit would result in far-reaching change on the island of
Ireland. This would particularly impact on North-South trade, which could no longer be
as frictionless as it is today. The impact of tariffs and of the customs and SPS
requirements and associated checks necessary to preserve Ireland’s full participation in
the Single Market and Customs Union would be significant for the operation of the all-
island economy and would involve additional costs for and disruption to businesses
throughout the island, particularly those in Northern Ireland. We continue to work closely
with the Commission with a view to minimising these negative consequences of no deal,
but any arrangement will clearly be sub-optimal.
Overall, the challenges associated with a no deal Brexit would be particularly significant
for the agri-food sector in Northern Ireland, given the relevance to the sector of issues
including but not limited to tariffs, seamless cross-border supply chains and food safety.
The economic impact for Northern Ireland could be further intensified by the approach
announced by the UK in mid-March that, on a unilateral and temporary basis, no tariffs
would be applied on goods crossing from Ireland into Northern Ireland.
[...]


My impression is that they don't know whats going to happen, exactly. Its just a lot of problems they have to brace for, and they beg the UK to avoid the worst.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby orthogon » Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:45 am UTC

Not technically Brexit, but part of the whole Brexit malaise: Rees-Mogg lays out a bunch of stupid rules for his staff. Leaving aside the idiotic linguistic prescriptivism, which inevitably has drawn the attention of the journos, what really dicked me off was the last one:

Jacob Etonii Twattius Rees-Mogg wrote:Use imperial measurements
[his bolding]

I mean, I've been jokingly referring to feet, inches, pounds etc. as "Brexit units", but it seems it's deadly serious: the rabid fuckwits on the Leave side really do want to go back to doing everything in furlongs and BTUs. No doubt his idea is that the "man in the street1" will understand them better, but we've been educating our schoolchildren in the metric system since at least the mid 1970s. It just feels like a deliberately spiteful anti-European move and yet another sop to those who think Britain was better in the days of smoking in pubs, leaded petrol and casual racism.

1Rees-Mogg wouldn't expect a woman to understand measurements in either system.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1456
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Xenomortis » Mon Jul 29, 2019 12:13 pm UTC

I see this more as "pushing his personal style", or how things "ought to be", to someone from the early 20th century (look at JRM and tell me "time-traveler" doesn't sometimes come to mind ;)).

orthogon wrote:we've been educating our schoolchildren in the metric system since at least the mid 1970s. It just feels like a deliberately spiteful anti-European move and yet another sop to those who think Britain was better in the days of smoking in pubs, leaded petrol and casual racism.

1Rees-Mogg wouldn't expect a woman to understand measurements in either system.

Context - I'm 28 and have lived my entire life in the UK (born 1990).

I would expect a 50-something year old to know what "50 pounds" looks like. I don't. I think about mass in kilos.
But...
When I think of body-weight, I think in stones (14lbs per st.), and this is typical for people my age or older. "Younger" people generally seem to use kilos (although most of the people I've spoken to about body weight tend to be athletes, so I wonder if that colours my observations).

I think about drinks in terms of pints (I buy milk in pints, beer is served in pints), and I use gallons when reasoning about fuel (even though I pay by the litre).
But when talking about volume? I suspect I'll use litres, cubic centimetres, or cubic metres.

"Distances" are generally metres, but I use miles, never kilometres.
Except sometimes it's yards (driving is always yards and miles).
Inches are reserved for small lengths (0.25" to 12"), and are approximate (millimetres for "exact" measurements, sometimes centimetres for more casual ones).
I generally only use feet for things that can be measured in a "small" number of them (say 0.5' to 20') - I can not understand the use of feet for altitude...
Body height is always in feet and inches.

Speeds are either "metres per second" or "miles per hour".

Land area is measured in acres, not hectares (which I cannot define, I just look at and go "this looks about 2 acres"), but area is otherwise measured in square metres (I can't handle square feet...).
Image

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2149
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Sableagle » Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:52 pm UTC

Failing to come up with a good analogy for this. Something about saying the life ring you've been thrown isn't pretty enough and you want a pony or you won't hold onto it?

Brexit secretary Stephen Barclay tells the EU to renegotiate ‘or face no deal’

“There is simply no chance of any deal being passed that includes the anti-democratic backstop. This is the reality that the EU has to face,” he said.

Barclay’s warning coincides with a leaked government document warning of a crisis in the education system if no-deal happens.

That article also coincides with this one:
Tory donor bets £300 million on losses for UK firms after no-deal Brexit

Crispin Odey, the pro-Brexit Conservative donor, reportedly waged a £300m bet against some of Britain’s biggest businesses on the implication their share prices will crash after Brexit.

The multimillionaire hedge fund tycoon’s company, Odey Asset Management, is understood to have taken out £299m in “short” positions on at least 16 firms including Royal Mail and Intu, the shopping centre owner.

On 23 July, when Boris Johnson was elected Tory party leader, Mr Odey’s company reportedly increased its “short” position in the high street lender Metro Bank. It currently has a £17.6m bet against the lender, according to a report in the Sunday Times.

Ian Murray, the Labour MP who champions the People’s Vote campaign, said: “It might not be illegal, but it stinks.”


Ian Murray sums up UK politics for the last ... 22 years or so ... pretty well there.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:20 am UTC

It stinks but the market is efficient: If he is buying shorts (betting share prices will fall more than a certain amount) someone else is buying longs (betting share prices won't fall that much).

Unless he has insider knowledge, because the market is efficient, and because the risk of a no-deal Brexit will have been priced in by all concerned, it's not possible to know ahead of time which side has it right.

And you can be pro-Brexit and still believe that Brexit will be bad for the economy. It just means you value a nebulous concept like 'sovereignty' more than, say, 'standard of living'. Easy for a billionaire to do but slightly less understandable for the just-getting-by's...

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2149
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Sableagle » Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:44 am UTC

Sovereignty and standards of living are both more available to billionaires than to the scraping-by majority, as dinner in a London club seems to be worth more to an MP than the standards of living of 65 million people.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:36 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:Sovereignty and standards of living are both more available to billionaires than to the scraping-by majority, as dinner in a London club seems to be worth more to an MP than the standards of living of 65 million people.

Hey. Don't blame the MPs. The majority of them are against any form of Brexit.

MPs are just confused about whether they should vote on the basis of their electorate's wishes or their electorate's best interests. As our representatives I believe they ought to do the latter but I can see the bind they are in thanks to Cameron's stupidity.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6890
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby ucim » Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:11 am UTC

elasto wrote:MPs are just confused about whether they should vote on the basis of their electorate's wishes or their electorate's best interests. As our representatives I believe they ought to do the latter but I can see the bind they are in thanks to Cameron's stupidity.
Depends why they're there in the first place.

In my view, I vote for hire representatives so that I don't have to be bothered with the minutiae of researching every ch*rping question that comes up, so that I can come to a reasonable opinion as to what should be done. Yes, I'll hire the ones that most closely align with the (broad) outlook and opinions I have, but when it comes to any individual thing, I want my representative to make their best judgment as to what aligns with my interests.

I may have an opinion as to what should be done on any individual thing, but it's usually underinformed. I don't have all the data, since I'm relying on media (and the ch*rpin google bubble) to inform me. My representative knows more (or I expect him or her to), and I'm willing to defer to their well thought out judgment.

What is disturbing to me is when their judgment is not well thought out, not intended to be in my best interests, and when they are poorly informed (especially when they choose to be poorly informed). But that, alas, is the problem.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

idonno
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby idonno » Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:25 am UTC

ucim wrote:I may have an opinion as to what should be done on any individual thing, but it's usually underinformed. I don't have all the data, since I'm relying on media (and the ch*rpin google bubble) to inform me. My representative knows more (or I expect him or her to), and I'm willing to defer to their well thought out judgment.

I agree with that being how representatives should operate in general but in the specific case where it has already officially been put to a vote by the people, it seems wrong to disregard that vote. That being said, it was idiotic and reckless to put a major long term change to a single popular vote like that. Something with that much impact should require a margin that won't flip back and forth very easily.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6890
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby ucim » Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:55 am UTC

idonno wrote:That being said, it was idiotic and reckless to put a major long term change to a single popular vote like that. Something with that much impact should require a margin that won't flip back and forth very easily.
Yeah, but it seems to go along with the (WTF?) idea of snap elections. I don't understand them, but it seems that in the EU, if the person in power thinks xe has a strong hand, they call a new election in order to get more representatives of xis party. It recently backfired, the same way brexit did (and perhaps for the same reason).

But the very idea of snap elections seems.... ironically undemocratic.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:04 am UTC

idonno wrote:
ucim wrote:I may have an opinion as to what should be done on any individual thing, but it's usually underinformed. I don't have all the data, since I'm relying on media (and the ch*rpin google bubble) to inform me. My representative knows more (or I expect him or her to), and I'm willing to defer to their well thought out judgment.

I agree with that being how representatives should operate in general but in the specific case where it has already officially been put to a vote by the people, it seems wrong to disregard that vote. That being said, it was idiotic and reckless to put a major long term change to a single popular vote like that. Something with that much impact should require a margin that won't flip back and forth very easily.


To my mind a representative has a duty to represent their entire constituency, not just the people who voted for them. This is even more clear in a referendum. A 52-48 split, depending on your point of view either is a mandate for "leave, but stay as close to the EU as possible" or "use your own judgement, the people are too evenly split to make a clear collective decision". In no reasonable interpretation is it any sort of mandate for what's happening right now.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:11 am UTC

Quercus wrote:To my mind a representative has a duty to represent their entire constituency, not just the people who voted for them. This is even more clear in a referendum. A 52-48 split, depending on your point of view either is a mandate for "leave, but stay as close to the EU as possible" or "use your own judgement, the people are too evenly split to make a clear collective decision". In no reasonable interpretation is it any sort of mandate for what's happening right now.

Exactly! This fact is so obvious to me I simply don't understand why I haven't heard any politician state it clearly and succinctly. If May had put it in these terms from the very beginning it's not out of the question we could have had a consensus both in the public and parliament on that basis. Instead we had nearly two years of 'Brexit means Brexit' where all sides of the British public simply hardened their positions...

It's no wonder the EU says 'hey, you voted for this three years ago, we negotiated for two years and now you want to tear it up and start again with a month left? And you refuse an extension? Ok, right, of course that's reasonable...'

Ironically, it's because the EU is far more democratic than is made out that is the reason they can't simply tear the whole thing up; there actually are a couple dozen sovereign countries that have to agree here - and we can't even find agreement within our single parliament...

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:48 am UTC

elasto wrote:
Quercus wrote:To my mind a representative has a duty to represent their entire constituency, not just the people who voted for them. This is even more clear in a referendum. A 52-48 split, depending on your point of view either is a mandate for "leave, but stay as close to the EU as possible" or "use your own judgement, the people are too evenly split to make a clear collective decision". In no reasonable interpretation is it any sort of mandate for what's happening right now.

Exactly! This fact is so obvious to me I simply don't understand why I haven't heard any politician state it clearly and succinctly. If May had put it in these terms from the very beginning it's not out of the question we could have had a consensus both in the public and parliament on that basis. Instead we had nearly two years of 'Brexit means Brexit' where all sides of the British public simply hardened their positions...

It's no wonder the EU says 'hey, you voted for this three years ago, we negotiated for two years and now you want to tear it up and start again with a month left? And you refuse an extension? Ok, right, of course that's reasonable...'

Ironically, it's because the EU is far more democratic than is made out that is the reason they can't simply tear the whole thing up; there actually are a couple dozen sovereign countries that have to agree here - and we can't even find agreement within our single parliament...


I've heard people from the smaller parties taking approximately this line. I think the conservatives are worried that it would lose them votes (nuance and compromise only seems to appear in the "to avoid" section of their strategy these days), and as for Labour, they couldn't make a clear statement if there was a fire and they needed to give emergency services the address.

Mutex
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Mutex » Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:00 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:I think the conservatives are worried that it would lose them votes (nuance and compromise only seems to appear in the "to avoid" section of their strategy these days), and as for Labour, they couldn't make a clear statement if there was a fire and they needed to give emergency services the address.

That's the problem - Nuance and compromise is undoubtedly the way out of this mess, but both main parties just got punished for any attempt at it. The "logic" that pushed both parties from compromise to their current extremes mirrored the attitude taken to the referendum result - More than 50% of party voters voted this way, so now the entire party has to be 100% that way. So now we've got a hard brexit party in power, and a hard remain party not in power. So, hard brexit it is.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Zamfir » Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:43 pm UTC

Labour is hardly hard-remain though? They seem to stick rather close to spirit of the referendum outcome. Soft leave, against hard leave, with a willingness to back remain, but only passively.

Mutex
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Mutex » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:00 pm UTC

Yeah I overstated their position tbh. They are backing a second referendum now though, which is very much on the remain side of things. In any case my point is the gap between the two main parties has widened to reflect the polarisation of the country.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby orthogon » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:10 pm UTC

Part of the problem is that there isn't really a compromise position to be had. Any intermediate position between full membership and hard Brexit is likely to be the worst of both worlds, or at least to please nobody. It's kind of a bimodal surface: each side thinks its peak is higher, but both sides probably agree there's a freaking deep valley in the middle.

ucim wrote:
idonno wrote:That being said, it was idiotic and reckless to put a major long term change to a single popular vote like that. Something with that much impact should require a margin that won't flip back and forth very easily.
Yeah, but it seems to go along with the (WTF?) idea of snap elections. I don't understand them, but it seems that in the EU, if the person in power thinks xe has a strong hand, they call a new election in order to get more representatives of xis party. It recently backfired, the same way brexit did (and perhaps for the same reason).

But the very idea of snap elections seems.... ironically undemocratic.

Jose


Every EU member state has its own democratic machinery: there's no harmonisation if the way in which nations elect their own national governments. There are various PR systems, FPTP systems, executive presidencies, parliamentary democracies, etc. In the UK, Prime Ministers used to be able to call snap elections whenever the omens were good (subject to a maximum of 5 years), but since the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2010 (?), elections are theoretically every 5 years. In practice, it turns out to be easier than was intended to force a snap election: a two-thirds majority is needed, but no self-respecting opposition would vote against it under normal circumstances. These, however, are far from normal circumstances, because of the timing of the default no-deal Brexit. It might be better to oppose the motion for an election, and instead use the mechanism of a Vote of No Confidence, since this would not immediately precipitate a General Election. Instead, there would be an opportunity to form a government of national unity in the existing House of Commons. This government could have the sole purpose of delaying Brexit.

ETA:
Mutex wrote:Yeah I overstated their position tbh. They are backing a second referendum now though, which is very much on the remain side of things. In any case my point is the gap between the two main parties has widened to reflect the polarisation of the country.

Not really: they're still riding both horses. They say they'd support a referendum on any Tory Brexit, and would campaign against it, but that they'd prefer a General Election, after which their government would negotiate a different, more Remainy Brexit (somewhere in that unhappy valley), which would not be subject to a referendum. It's a position utterly devoid of principle. It's a shame, as I have nothing against my MP, but I would have to vote for her with gritted teeth.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:19 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:Part of the problem is that there isn't really a compromise position to be had. Any intermediate position between full membership and hard Brexit is likely to be the worst of both worlds, or at least to please nobody. It's kind of a bimodal surface: each side thinks its peak is higher, but both sides probably agree there's a freaking deep valley in the middle.


From where I'm standing I don't see any hard Brexit "peak" at all. I'm asking out of genuine interest - what would be better under a hard Brexit compared to one based on the deal currently being offered by the EU?

That's one of the reasons why I'm having a really hard time with the current situation - I can't wrap my head around what concrete advantages a hard Brexit provides for the UK compared to any of the other options on the table.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby orthogon » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:27 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
orthogon wrote:Part of the problem is that there isn't really a compromise position to be had. Any intermediate position between full membership and hard Brexit is likely to be the worst of both worlds, or at least to please nobody. It's kind of a bimodal surface: each side thinks its peak is higher, but both sides probably agree there's a freaking deep valley in the middle.


From where I'm standing I don't see any hard Brexit "peak" at all. I'm asking out of genuine interest - what would be better under a hard Brexit compared to one based on the deal currently being offered by the EU?

That's one of the reasons why I'm having a really hard time with the current situation - I can't wrap my head around what concrete advantages a hard Brexit provides for the UK compared to any of the other options on the table.

Yes, I agree: the hard-Brexit peak is at most a minor local maximum. But bending over backwards to give Leavers the benefit of the doubt, I can see an argument that it might be better to be out of the EU altogether than to be almost out, subject to all the rules with none of the benefits and no influence. I suspect even that isn't true, since we'll want to do some trade with the EU and that will immediately bring us back to the "not quite out" pessimum.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:11 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Plasma_Wolf » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:32 pm UTC

The labour leadership is very much on the side of leave. The majority of labour voters is very much remain, but Corbyn is on the hand of those who were left behind in the poorer areas. That's where the leave-voting labour people are. Corbyn is gambling on being a representative for both, which is failing. The same narrative you saw with the conservatives after their horrid loss in the local and European elections (This vote shift to the remain parties means the people want us to leave) is visible in the labour leadership. They continue to say that they'd lose votes if they'd become less on the hand of Brexit, but in reality they're losing far more voters from the remain side with their current plans.

Also, the fact that most MPs agree with the majority of the labour voters doesn't matter. Corbyn and his group of friends are very much in control of labour and that makes them an unreliable party for the near future.

EDIT: I may have been sniped but there may still be something new in my post :)

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:35 pm UTC

The only advantage that immediately springs to mind would be if we walked away from our divorce bill of £33B - but if we refused to honour our debts in that way there'd be no chance of any kind of decent trade deal with the EU for a generation, so it'd be a Pyrrhic victory at best.

Honestly, given that we hadn't even begun negotiating the future trade agreement (May's deal was more like negotiating the terms of future negotiations) I see absolutely no benefit to an immediate hard Brexit vs an honest reboot of negotiations (which the EU have said they would be perfectly agreeable to).

orthogon wrote:But bending over backwards to give Leavers the benefit of the doubt, I can see an argument that it might be better to be out of the EU altogether than to be almost out, subject to all the rules with none of the benefits and no influence. I suspect even that isn't true, since we'll want to do some trade with the EU and that will immediately bring us back to the "not quite out" pessimum.

That's why the sovereignty argument is nonsense. Trade agreements always entail 'giving up' sovereignty in any sense that really matters. Any time you sell into a market that has some standard of QA, you have no choice but to abide by said standard even if you had no say in crafting it.

(Yes, we 'regain control of our borders' but EU immigration was never and would never have been a genuine issue. Far more immigrants came in from non-EU countries which we had full control over and we never stopped them because it was not in our interest to do so.)

simondrake
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:19 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby simondrake » Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:38 pm UTC

I like to turn Leave objections to the EU back on them.
One of the common lies was the creation of an EU Army (Which is not true). And I say so what? Maybe an EU Army would be a good thing, unify Europe under a single military, make economies of scale by pooling our resources. Sounds pretty good to me.

maybeagnostic
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:34 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby maybeagnostic » Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:10 pm UTC

elasto wrote:That's why the sovereignty argument is nonsense. Trade agreements always entail 'giving up' sovereignty in any sense that really matters. Any time you sell into a market that has some standard of QA, you have no choice but to abide by said standard even if you had no say in crafting it.
If you are the most powerful empire in the world dictating terms to colonies and local governments, you really aren't giving up any sovereignty with a "trade deal." Of course, the UK hasn't been in a position to do that for over a century and even when it had been, I find it hard to believe the current EU trade deals don't produce vastly better results for regular people than those century-old ones ever did. Still I imagine the sovereignty argument lies on some vague notion of a mythical past where "we" always got things the way "we" wanted them, same as any other modern nationalist appeal.
T: ... through an emergency induction port.
S: That's a straw, Tali.
T: Emerrrgency induction port.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:57 pm UTC

Amongst the more delusional of Leave's delusions is that we can negotiate better trade deals out than in, but, not only that, that they will be quick in any way.

Are trade deals really that complicated to negotiate?
Trade deals are monumentally complex. When Greenland, a country with a population smaller than that of Uxbridge and an economy based essentially on a single industry (fishing), withdrew from the EU in 1985, it took three years to negotiate its future relationship with the bloc.

Ceta, the EU-Canada deal, took seven years to negotiate and was about 22 years in the making. But this was a relatively simple trade agreement that does not include the services provisions and deals on non-tariff barriers that a big exporter of professional services such as Britain will almost certainly require.

How long could ratification take?
EU procedures for ratifying trade agreements are much tougher than for ratifying the article 50 withdrawal deal, which needs only a qualified majority in the council and a majority in the European parliament.

A trade agreement cutting across policy areas in the preserve of member states would be classed as a “mixed agreement” and require unanimity in the council, a majority in the European parliament, and ratification in all 27 national parliaments as well as in some regional parliaments (including that of Wallonia, which almost derailed the Ceta deal). That is 36 legislatures, each with a veto.

Donald Tusk, the European council president, has said repeatedly the negotiation and ratification process could take between five and seven years. Brussels insiders, particularly trade specialists, think this is highly optimistic.

Wouldn’t it be quicker to start from scratch?
Even the nuclear option – a hard Brexit followed by reliance on existing World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – could take years to achieve. The first, and more surmountable, problem is that Britain is a signatory to WTO deals through its membership of the EU.

Assuming other WTO members agree to overlook this and transfer existing rights to Britain without seeking to unpick unpopular elements, there is an even bigger problem. This relates to the import and export quotas shared among EU member states. In the case of lamb, for example, the WTO schedule permits 283,825 tonnes of sheep and goat meat to be imported duty-free into the EU from 14 countries, ranging down to just 100 tonnes from Greenland.

British farmers would need to fight to secure their share of this existing schedule to export into EU and non-EU markets, a fiendishly complicated prospect just in one small agricultural category.


By leaving with May's deal, I'm sure the EU would be happy to trade on broadly existing terms for the 5-10 years it would take to negotiate the new relationship. Leave with a hard Brexit though and all bets are literally off, not least because it only takes one country with a chip on its shoulder to hold the whole thing to ransom eg. over Gibralter.

And, gee, the City of London is a huge part of our treasury income. A hard Brexit risks many if not most firms moving to mainland Europe, and Boris as former London Mayor must know that as well as anyone...

source

ijuin
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby ijuin » Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:38 am UTC

Generally, the ability to dictate the terms of agreements unilaterally requires that the side doing so have a superior position regarding the relevant area—trade, military, infrastructure, or whatever—or else that the other side needs them more than they need the other side. The UK possesses neither in this endeavor—the loss of trade will hurt the UK more than it will the EU, and the UK does not have the power to bully the entire EU without making it a Pyrrhic victory at best.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Thu Aug 08, 2019 7:53 am UTC

ijuin wrote:Generally, the ability to dictate the terms of agreements unilaterally requires that the side doing so have a superior position regarding the relevant area—trade, military, infrastructure, or whatever—or else that the other side needs them more than they need the other side.

Yeah.

For example, it's bizarre that anyone would ever think that the self-proclaimed 'master of the deal' Trump would pass up an opportunity to screw over an opponent in trade negotiations...

Yeah. Of course we will strike a better deal with the US than we could as part of the world's largest trading block... Because of our special relationship innit!

maybeagnostic
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:34 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby maybeagnostic » Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:29 am UTC

To be fair, I am pretty sure Trump is wholly incapable of personally negotiating even the simplest of trade deals. Luckily for the US, he wouldn't be the one negotiating.
T: ... through an emergency induction port.
S: That's a straw, Tali.
T: Emerrrgency induction port.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Zamfir » Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:13 pm UTC

For example, it's bizarre that anyone would ever think that the self-proclaimed 'master of the deal' Trump would pass up an opportunity to screw over an opponent in trade negotiations...

Could he sell that to the audience though? My impression is that Americans, on average, are extremely favourably disposed to the Brits. More than to any other people probably and definitely more than to the EU. While the deep insiders in Washington look favourable on UK wartime loyalty.

Trumps likes to go on TV and brag how he screwed over country X or Y. But would that really work for a UK after Brexit? He gets more mileage from bashing China, or Mexico, or Germany, or even Canada.

That leaves enough problems for the UK, but they would be the standard ones of trade negotiations, not Trump-specials. Basically, lots of market access for American companies on American terms. Complaints about chlorinated chicken won't get you much sympathy from Americans who have to eat the stuff themselves.

But the other of the coin is UK access to the US market, and I can see the UK getting some freebies there, out of US sympathy.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3998
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Dauric » Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:40 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
For example, it's bizarre that anyone would ever think that the self-proclaimed 'master of the deal' Trump would pass up an opportunity to screw over an opponent in trade negotiations...

Could he sell that to the audience though? My impression is that Americans, on average, are extremely favourably disposed to the Brits. More than to any other people probably and definitely more than to the EU. While the deep insiders in Washington look favourable on UK wartime loyalty.


I think this depends on who's actually doing the negotiations. If it's being handled largely by career bureaucrats then the assumption of age-old loyalties may hold. Trump himself however has no sense of loyalty beyond whoever is stroking his ego at the moment. Now the current British PM might get along 'tremendously' with Trump and secure decent terms, but if anything is a constant it's Trump's inconstancy.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Mutex
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Mutex » Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:46 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
For example, it's bizarre that anyone would ever think that the self-proclaimed 'master of the deal' Trump would pass up an opportunity to screw over an opponent in trade negotiations...

Could he sell that to the audience though? My impression is that Americans, on average, are extremely favourably disposed to the Brits. More than to any other people probably and definitely more than to the EU. While the deep insiders in Washington look favourable on UK wartime loyalty.

Trumps likes to go on TV and brag how he screwed over country X or Y. But would that really work for a UK after Brexit? He gets more mileage from bashing China, or Mexico, or Germany, or even Canada.

Americans on the left might be, much less so Trump's base. I'm pretty sure his base would be at least as happy to "put America first" with the UK as they are with Canada.

Zamfir wrote:Complaints about chlorinated chicken won't get you much sympathy from Americans who have to eat the stuff themselves.

Well, it seems to get sympathy from health-conscious Americans on the left who would prefer EU-style food standards.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby elasto » Thu Aug 08, 2019 6:22 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:My impression is that Americans, on average, are extremely favourably disposed to the Brits. More than to any other people probably and definitely more than to the EU. While the deep insiders in Washington look favourable on UK wartime loyalty.

Trumps likes to go on TV and brag how he screwed over country X or Y. But would that really work for a UK after Brexit? He gets more mileage from bashing China, or Mexico, or Germany, or even Canada.

He is the most protectionist president of recent times though. He is picking trade fights with literally all his important trade partners on the basis of 'America first'.

The truth is though that any trade agreement most likely won't be ratified until long after he has left office; So it's all down to whether his protectionism is viewed as a success. My guess is that it will be. Populist policies tend to be popular rather by definition.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby orthogon » Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:29 am UTC

elasto wrote:
ijuin wrote:Generally, the ability to dictate the terms of agreements unilaterally requires that the side doing so have a superior position regarding the relevant area—trade, military, infrastructure, or whatever—or else that the other side needs them more than they need the other side.

Yeah.

For example, it's bizarre that anyone would ever think that the self-proclaimed 'master of the deal' Trump would pass up an opportunity to screw over an opponent in trade negotiations...

Yeah. Of course we will strike a better deal with the US than we could as part of the world's largest trading block... Because of our special relationship innit!

The other really stupid thing is the Brexiteers going on about all the positive noises they're getting from Washington. Of course the US is going to make out that they're going to give us a great deal just as soon as we get that hard Brexit over with. I suspect the deal might suddenly get about five orders of magnitude less favourable the moment we're out of the EU and some fuckwit cabinet minister is turning up at Dulles airport with begging bowl in hand.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2149
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Sableagle » Sat Aug 10, 2019 10:54 am UTC

Washington before Brexit:

Image

Then, suddenly:
It is too late for the UK to leave the European Union with any kind of deal by 31 October, according to polling expert Professor Sir John Curtice.

He also warned the Tories would struggle if a general election was forced on them before 31 October, as they would lose votes to the Brexit Party.

But he added if, as Downing Street hopes, it is pushed to November, then the Tories could receive a boost from the Leave vote.


Washington after Brexit:

Image
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby orthogon » Sat Aug 10, 2019 1:10 pm UTC

Pretty much that, yes. Top giffing.

Plus, even if we did get a good deal, Trump has already made it clear that an international agreement isn't something he feels any particular need to adhere to.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2149
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Sableagle » Sun Aug 11, 2019 3:59 pm UTC

Looks like we're about to make the USAF rich.

The Department for Transport has raised concerns that queues at Dover will lead to delays in providing critical medical supplies to patients across the country.

According to The Sunday Telegraph ministers have put together a £300 million no-deal contract which will see firms supply planes to air-lift vital supplies.

Ministers will reportedly ask companies to provide “aircraft that can be used for the provision of capacity for the transportation of freight vehicles”.

The contract states that those companies will supply goods “identified by the Government as being critical to the preservation of human and animal welfare and/or national security”.

The proposed system will partly replace former Transport Secretary Chris Grayling’s failed plan to contract private ferries to bring supplies to the UK in the event of no deal.

Mr Grayling ran up an £80m bill ahead of the original Brexit deadline in March, after awarding Seaborne Freight the contract, only to cancel it when it emerged they had never run a ferry service before and did not own any ships.


Right, so they somehow spent 80 million quid trying to make an arrangement with a company that didn't have any ships or any idea how to use them, and now they want to spend ... oh, let me guess, about £350 million a week? Whatever huge amount, the idea is to fly trucks into Britain to get around delays at existing ferry terminals.

Probably spend another £80 negotiating with some minister's school buddy who has his own Cessna 172 before somebody points out that you can't move trucks with one of those. Ought to buy a rich guy a third home in the conutry that his daughter can use for her wedding reception, anyway. Shame it won't get any medicine to any patients.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:11 pm UTC

Re: British EU referendum in June [update: Leave wins 52% - 48%, politics ensue]

Postby Plasma_Wolf » Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:02 am UTC

no-deal contract


This is a stupid concept and it should be on billboard in the UK and viral on Twitter unit Brexit day so Lyle understand the complete stupidity of the contract that is based on no-deal.

Yes I know that I'm slightly twisting words here. :)


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests