What next?

Someone on the news last week said their son worked for Airbus but, if he lost his job, it would still be worth it. Let's hope he doesn't have a mortgage and a family if it happens.

Exactly Varian, it was so so unnecessary .

It is quite alarming how many people have been brainwashed into thinking that a no-deal brexit is perferctly OK.

What is wrong with these people that they want to harm themselves, their families , their neighbours, and relegate their country to the fourth division of world powers?

Just watched Sky News. As usual, people were told about the possible/probable problems that leaving the EU will create and the only reply was 'everything will be ok' and 'just get on with it'. I've yet to hear any of them put forward a solution to the problems. Oh, and also read that arch brexiteer Bamford only pays a fraction of his tax in this country. What a surprise....

and another one - better the devil you know.

Out of the frying pan and into the fire comes to mind. If we leave with no deal we will watch the decline of our country and at some point in the future will go grovelling back on EU terms and not the favourable ones we have now. Surely, if in doubt, don't?

The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts

Perhaps Mumsnet should be reading Gransnet.

Actually mcem it’s time to stop younger people thinking that Brexit voters are not all or even mainly right wing voters, and that many Labour constituences as we know mainly voted to leave the EU.Not all were over 50 either.
Unfortunately younger people have always thought( from time immemorial) that older people know nothing.Until they grow up a bit of course.

Quite apart from voicing our own opinions I'd dearly like to think that many on GN might take 5 minutes to read at least part of the MN thread.
It's quite a revelation!

I don't know why people are worrying about a possible European army when this country is faced with utter chaos caused by irresponsible Governments in a few week;s time.

Of course there are proposals by the EU that we may not all agree with but surely the more immediate threat to the UK is a no-deal Brexit! The EU isn't perfect because nothing is and the alternative (UK trading on its own terms) is a huge gamble with our economy, our jobs and our future.

If you watched everyone being interviewed on TV lately you'd expect that everyone living here supports Leave because Remainers are either not being selected for interview or are too scared to speak publicly about their views.

The same thing happened with the last Question Time. The audience appeared to be mainly Leave supporters but the majority of voters in the Winchester constituency in 2016 voted Remain.

What do I want to happen? Revoke Article 50 and let everyone have a period of peace and stability to deal with the shocking problems here caused by years .of austerity.

Well thanks for that link Varian.
Am pleased to see that my opinions are so close to those of the younger
generation. I know how my own family members feel but we do have the Scotland issue too (on which we are nearly all agreed.)
I now wish we could somehow make it clear that all over-50's are not right-wing proBrexit voters.

There is a very interesting thread on Mumsnet where the OP asks "what do you actually want to happen?"

I strongly recommend it to GNetters who don't have much opportunity to hear the views of younger parents.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/eu_referendum_2016_/3488908-What-do-you-actually-WANT-to-happen-next-PV-WA-ND-Revoke?pg=1

The repercussions for the UK of a no-deal Brexit could be similar to the national emergency faced by Iceland during the volcanic eruptions in 2010 that brought parts of the country to a standstill, according to advice being given to civil servants.

The warning comes from the Cabinet Office, which is coordinating training for thousands of staff across Whitehall to help prepare departments for a disorderly departure from the European Union on 29 March.

The impact on Iceland from the volcanic ash clouds in 2010 is regarded as a useful example of the kind of escalating disruption that could face the UK this spring, according to those who have attended the closed seminars.

Staff have been told to look at the example of the eruptions from Eyjafjallajökull because they caused extensive disruption within Iceland that then reverberated across Europe. In particular, air travel was thrown into turmoil, with hundreds of thousands of people left stranded by cancelled flights.

The Cabinet Office believes this represents the “nearest recent example” of what government departments could have to cope with. But the potential disruption to the UK from Brexit is likely to be much broader, according to the government’s private planning assumptions.

The comparisons, and the lack of detailed preparations at the heart of government, are causing immense disquiet among some rank-and-file civil servants. “The level of planning required for no-deal Brexit is the same level as war planning,” said one Whitehall source. “A no-deal Brexit will have the same systemic impact. Iceland gives us hints and clues about what might happen, but Brexit is unlike anything we have ever seen.”

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/25/cabinet-office-compares-no-deal-brexit-to-iceland-ash-cloud-chaos

Bluejay29
I think you'll find that lots of posters gave their opinion on the eu army on a thread started on 22Jan.

This week Macron and Merkel have been discussing a European Federal Army.. who knows if they will be conscripting young men and women? I don't like that idea. Britain will not be included in this when we leave. Any thoughts?

There are at least 4 people on this forum who praise Farage and UKIP. Not one of them is able to say why though?

Government 'should shut down parliament' if MPs delay Brexit, says Jacob Rees-Mogg

news.sky.com/story/government-should-shut-down-parliament-if-mps-delay-brexit-says-jacob-rees-mogg-11615455

Some democrat!

Nonnie- the thread is- Merkel clearly calling for an EU Army, hope you can locate it. I found it in “last day”

POGS I've looked in active but can't find the thread and the search facility still isn't working. Can you post a link please?

Thanks, haven't seen that thread

Nonnie

That's why I started a thread discussing the EU Army argument.

For years we have discussed the EU Army issue, ' PRIOR TO ' the UK Referendum and the subject get's lost when the subject is not specific and posts ramble.

What are the arguments for and against an EU army? In addition of course to ^Pollaidh's* post above.

As reported in the Independent last November: Emmanuel Macron has called for the creation of a “true European army” to allow the EU defend itself from threats ranging from Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin. The French president has pushed for closer EU defence union since coming to power last year but has been so far met with limited success amid foot-dragging by other member states.
“When I see President Trump announcing that he’s quitting a major disarmament treaty which was formed after the 1980s Euro-missile crisis that hit Europe, who is the main victim? Europe and its security.” “We need a Europe which defends itself better alone, without just depending on the United States, in a more sovereign manner.”
The election of Mr Trump to the White House appears to have given more urgency to the cause of boosting the EU’s defence capabilities, with leaders warning they cannot simply rely on the United States.
France is the strongest and most vocal proponent of an EU army but Germany has also tentatively endorsed Mr Macron’s proposals for a joint command structure for military interventions.
A number of proposals have been put on the table for how EU nations could cooperate more closely on defence. The European Commission says closer defence cooperation “is not about creating an EU army”.
Thirty-four joint missions by member states have been launched under the EU flag since 2003 under the Common Security and Defence Policy.
Under the new “Permanent Structured Cooperation” (Pesco) initiative legislated for in 2009 and activated in 2017, 25 of the 28 armed forces are in the process of stepping up cooperation between their militaries. Denmark, Malta and the United Kingdom have decided to opt out of the voluntary system.

So, acting together as a force is not new. France and Germany are the strongest voices, but other states unsure. Countries can opt out.
To my mind, scare stories about an EU army are just that, scare stories, half-truths. Nothing to stop us treating it like the Euro and opting out.

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/theresa-may-clip-from-channel-4-news-surfaces-saying-remaining-in-eu-is-better-than-brexit-1-5817136