More Brexit lunacy

I have a picture in my mind of the Boris bridge, six lanes, packed end to end in both directions, nothing moving.

It won’t solve the space problem each end particularly for freight.

The obvious way for them to solve the problem is move their headquarters to France.

I have seen it reported in several places that Eurostar/Eurotunnel have quietly said they think it unlikely they will be able to continue to operate if Brexit goes ahead. Much of the reason is practical with the limited spaces at either end of the journey to do necessary checks.
They are also worried about financial charges and have no idea whether or not they will be simply treated as the third country company. Their HQ is in U.K.

“But for sure – except if you change your mind – you will not be part of the single market, as you will not be part of the European Union.”

How is that not agreeing with Corbyn?

The costs of Brexit are mounting - fast. If Brexit wasn’t happening, taxpayers wouldn’t be paying another huge bill. It's yet another sign that Theresa May's Conservatives are badly bungling Brexit. another huge bill.

The French President is able to demand £45 million because he also has the option of withdrawing co-operation over the special border control in Calais, as the UK withdraws from the EU.

Parliament needs to be told when this money was budgeted for, and what guarantees the UK has secured in return, if any, for future co-operation on our border security.

But better yet, Theresa May's Conservatives should back our (LibDems) plan for a referendum on the deal - and give you the final say on Brexit, with a chance to remain if you don't like the deal you're offered.

www.libdems.org.uk/another-huge-brexit-bill

At least you know where you stand on the issue with the Lib Dems!

"Agreeing with Corbyn

As you decided to leave, you cannot be part of the single market”

How do you work that one out.

When the likes of Osborne, May and Cameron stated leaving the EU means leaving the Single Market they were accused of misleading the public.

Plenty of posters have argued this point since the Refendum took place.

Corbyn faces 2 ways over the Single Market dependent on who is talking to at the time. The time lines of Corbyn / McDonnell/Starmer comments show Labour are in one minute out the next .

What matters is not what Labour/Tories /SNP/Lib Dems WANT it is what they can GET.

Thus far the EU Parliament and Commission are immovable ' Abide by the 4 Pillars/Freedoms or leave the Single Market'.
To abide by the 4 Pillars/Freedoms means we have Remained in the European Union and it is time ALL parties told the truth to the Electorate where they stand IN or OUT.

Macron was pretty impressive, but it really shouldn't have to take a foreign leader to explain to the British people that "the closest possible relationship is the one you have now - as the UK is a member of the EU"

Macron hit the nail on the head.

“You ask unhappy people a straight yes/no question and see what you get”

Also agreeing with Corbyn

“As you decided to leave, you cannot be part of the single market”

It seems to me Brexiteers are willing for the country to be worse off, higher prices, jobs lost etc as long as they “ take back control” .

Macron on Marr

“Calmly and politely exposed the U.K. government’s Brexit delusions”

Campbell

Kier Starmer has responded to the CBI, saying that Labour will fight to remain in the CU.

Step by step folks!

It's pretty apparent by this thread. You are willing the UK to be worse off because then your whining will be justified.

That is an incredible personal attack on individual GNetters just because they hold a different point of view to yours Day6.

Sorry, democracy.

" “Democracy is not just about one vote once every five years or one vote once on a particular issue causing all argument on that matter to be considered legitimately shut down,” he said.

“That is not the way democracy works. Democracy is a dynamic concept. People who are on the losing side are not obliged to accept that their view has been lost for ever and they are perfectly entitled to continue to argue for it.” "

I am pleased the speaker recognises what deomocracy means.

You've responded to a question I didn't ask, Day6.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-cost-uk-households-500-per-year-leave-eu-nick-clegg-lib-dem-leader-cebr-theresa-may-a7713526.html

Did you not notice this on the same page?
Economic growth means nothing to those on the bottom rung who have already lost money because of Brexit.

MaizieD I don't thnk anyone expected this transitional period between being in and out of the EU to be a stable one. I'd also say when has our economy remained stable for years and years?

There are going to be all sorts of gloomy predictions given Leavers liken Brexit to an abyss in to which we are about to fall. Project Fear is still alive and well and given the way you Remainers are pouncing on the day to day minutiae of negotiations long before we leave the EU, you are all looking for doom-laden scenarios to fulfil your gloom-ridden prophecies.

It's pretty apparent by this thread. You are willing the UK to be worse off because then your whining will be justified.

Here - an article from the Independent to throw a little cheer into your gloom-fest.

UK economy will perform better than we thought in 2018, says CEBR think tank

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-economy-growth-forecast-2018-perform-better-predict-cebr-think-tank-a7952426.html

POGS

With reference to a 2nd (3rd?) referendum you ask:

I voted Remain but I also accept The Prime Minister , whoever he/she may be and from whatever Party he/she may be from , should do as the electorate majority wants it to do when a democratic vote has taken place.

The alternative style of governance has another name does it not.

Firstly I would say that the 2016 referendum was advisory; Cameron had no right to 'promise' that the result would be accepted. By doing that he exceeded his executive powers, as only Parliament, the legislature, had the right to make that decision and they didn't. Parliament voted to hold an advisory referendum.

But, as we cannot change the past. If we held another 'advisory' referendum and the result were reversed; the electorate then advising the government that they wanted to remain in the EU, what then would be your thoughts?

As for your other questions, why insist that we Remainers answer them? We actually want to Remain in the EU. All we are doing here, ATM, is looking at both parties' attempts to come up with a solution. We're not particularly approving one or the other.

Why don't you get the Leavers to answer your questions? (And I wish you the Best of British with that...)

Of course, the enormous fly in the ointment is the problem of Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement and the NI border. This has not been solved at all and is puzzling a great many people.

As for your hint that to ignore the result of the 2016 referendum would mean that the government would be acting as a dictatorship and not democratically I rather think that is happening anyway. The initial 'promise' was an abuse of Executive powers; trying to invoke A50 without parliamentary approval was an attempt to exceed Executive powers and the attempt to assume Henry VIII powers over the EU withdrawal legislation is also a step towards removing power from our sovereign parliament.

Reversing the result of a badly thought out and badly run advisory referendum with the approval of Parliament doesn't, in comparison, seem to me to be a dictatorial act.

Brilliant, whitewave. Brexiteers will not agree, though.

Excellent and so apt tweet from Matt Rees

The red lines and subsequent trips to the EU are like a divorce where one party doesn’t want any furniture at all, but wants to keep the sofa, dining table and chairs, bed cabinets etc. But not the furniture. Oh no!!

This is quite funny. Poor Gove has to go to Brussels to explain why our pollution levels have not dropped.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/air-pollution-uk-michael-gove-eu-illegal-levels-environment-vehicles-diesel-petrol-london-a8168261.html

No wonder they want out of the European Court of Justice.

"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a flexible opt-out from legislation adopted in the area of freedom, security and justice, which includes all matters previously part of the pre-Amsterdam Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) pillar.[49] This allows them to opt-in or out of legislation and legislative initiatives on a case-by-case basis, which they usually do, except on matters related to Schengen.[50] The opt-out from the JHA policy area was originally obtained by both states in the Treaty of Amsterdam of 1997, and was retained with the Treaty of Lisbon.[51]"

POGS As I and many others have said before, the UK could tighten up procedures to legally limit migration in the way that other European countries have done.
Staying in the Single Market does indeed mean accepting the four freedoms.
However, as the four freedoms, single market and customs union were not on the ballot paper there is no mandate to insist on what happens in relation to any of them.
All it said was “remain or leave the EU”.