More Brexit lunacy

POGS Do you perhaps mean "a customs union" compared to "the customs union"? There is some logic in this but Yes, it means Labour wants a bespoke deal too.
The EU are also keep contradicting themselves on this. Macron said a bespoke deal was possible recently but others in the EU keep saying it's not possible.
I agree Labour as well as the Conservative Government are trying to fudge the issues. I think they are deliberately trying to obfuscate so as not to offend any of their conflicted MPs or party members or voters.
If there are enough confusing messages (often in the same speech) the Government hopes no one will realise that the Brexit finally delivered (or not) will not be what the Leave voters for as Fox said the other day as it's impossible to achieve the Brexit dream without destroying our economy.

Well - couldn't we just forget about Brexit?

Maizie

"So far The EU27 have compromised on nothing in negotiations. It's delusional to think that they would do anything different over this 'deal',"

White wave

"If anyone think that there will be a bespoke deal then they haven’t been keeping up."
--

It is fair to say we have been in debate/arguing over the position of what sort of 'deal' can and will be struck between the EU and UK. since the Referendum Result.

Both of you and a ' few other posters ' have repeatedly posted how the UK could remain in the Single Market / Customs Union by joining EFTA/ETA. I have maintained this was not possible without the UK adhering to the 4 Pillars/Freedoms which includes the FREE Movement of People. Both the Conservative and Labour parties have stated Free Movement of People 'will end'.

You have also backed Keir Starmer/Labours latest rhetoric of having what they are calling. ' A DEAL ' , not ' THE DEAL', if I haven't mixed posters up. .

What do you think is the difference between the Labour rhetoric of 'A DEAL , not THE DEAL'. and the Conservative rhetoric of ' A BESPOKE DEAL'? What does ' A DEAL' mean ? Would ' A DEAL ' not be bespoke?.

Both parties have stated No 2nd Referendum. Both parties accepted to leave the European Union means leaving the Single Market and Customs Union as it stands because of treaty obligations . I don't see much of a difference between both partes so can anybody explain it too me what I am missing?

If the only difference is one party will protect jobs, the environment and workers rights then I think that is a red herring.

exiting member (well existing exiting ..)

We have a brilliant deal at the moment, better than most members. Sad isn’t it?

lemongrove, it is set in stone, and has been right from the start- there can be NO deal that will leave the UK with a better deal than other EU members.

Mind you, we did have this, rebates, no Euro, no Schengen- these were exceptional terms- but our recent actions have destroyed all this.

Switzerland had a Referendum in Feb 2014- same result, 48/50 (to limit immigration) - and ever since, the Swiss GVT have been trying to find a way to implement this, without the disastrous effect on the Swiss Economy, universites, research in all fields, etc. And the reply has been totally firm from the EU- YOU CANNOT HAVE A DEAL WITH US WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE FREE MOVEMENT.

The Swiss GVT has more or less persuaded the population that it was a mistake- and how damaging it would be- but a small minority on the extreme right, the SVP/UDC are making a lot of noise and want to force the GVT to implement.

One big difference is, that Switzerland has a Direct Democracy, where Referendums are binding- whereas the UK as a Parliamentary Democracy- where referendums are NOT, and can only be, by our own Laws- consultative. Cameron had no right whatsoever to ignore our own Laws, and say it would be acted upon. No right whatsoever.

The EU is not punishing us, or being ackward- it makes total sense that they can't give one member, let alone an existing member, special terms-- that would likley lead to the other 27 asking for bespoke deals on this, that or the other. Makes total sense.

As said, the UK had already achieved a bespoke deal before - with the best terms anyone could have- but decided to throw it away- in the most cavalier and damaging of ways.

Never forget that a 5% drop in our GDP is equivalent to the Great Depression.

If anyone think that there will be a bespoke deal then they haven’t been keeping up.

Philip Lee a Tory MP friend of Maybot said

The next phase of brexit has to be all about evidence. We can’t just dismiss this and move on. If there is evidence to the contrary we need to see and consider that too.
He then spoke about the leaked economic figures

if these figures are anywhere near right, there is a serious question over whether the government could legitimately lead a country along a path that the evidence and rational consideration indicate that it could be seriously damaging

It is time for evidence not dogma to show the way.
We must act for our countries best interests, not ideology or populism, or history will judge us harshly. Our country deserves no less.

I so agree we should proceed on evidence and not populism or dogma

Some people will just never believe anything that doesn't concur with their views, Maizie.

And remember, the EU is not an 'it', it's a 'they'; all 27 of them.

There can be a bespoke deal or any other deal that the EU like, it’s not set in stone you know.

So far The EU27 have compromised on nothing in negotiations. It's delusional to think that they would do anything different over this 'deal',

I'm surprised he Speaker isn't intervening in this. It feels like contempt of Parliament. Perhaps it will come to that. The comments by Heidi Allen and Antoinette Sandbach were particularly pertinent I felt. Of course they must be able to best represent their constituents.

We will have a bespoke deal providing eu tell us what it is!

newsthump.com/2018/01/30/brexit-impact-statements-described-as-project-fear-by-the-government-that-wrote-them/

There can be a bespoke deal or any other deal that the EU like, it’s not set in stone you know.

Interesting that they are still flogging the bespoke deal idea, of which at present they are clueless.

They clearly haven’t been listening to the EU 27. “There will be no bespoke deal apart from those in existence”

Keir Starmer said it perfectly:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-brexit-reports-government-theresa-may-uk-keir-starmer-economy-impact-urgent-question-a8185231.html

Not even Del Boy or the worse second hand car dealer could get away with those lies upon lies.

So when he said the impact assessments existed, he was not lying - but they decided he should lie about them and said they didn't exist- because they were so bad. Must say I did think so at the time ... His pants are constantly on fire- but someone else is turning his key. He is like the Duracel rabbit - running out of power very quickly. He truly looks sick, puffy, grey/yellow and his laugh ahahaha is hysterical.

Number 10 refusing to back Baker

They'd have to put it in writing, though, whitewave, as Baker always has his fingers in his ears.

No Baker

Who should get the sack - Davis?
I would be surprised if he has not begged for it now, but May has said no, you created the mess, you can get us out of it.

Did you see Rees-Mogg threaten the Lords yesterday?
This is their response.

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/lord-campbell-jacob-mogg-1-5375248

He said one Rees-Mogg is very much like another.

I think he should get the sack

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/steve-baker-insulting-claim-1-5375503

Do you think the unions should call a strike?

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/lib-dem-mp-tom-brake-impact-of-brexit-1-5369750

This is about the stuff that Davis only allowed MPs to slook at one at a time under the promise that they wouldn't say what they had seen.