Can anybody explain Brexit please?

Nonnie

A pity the EU will not do a 'Free Deal' with the UK.

Did Japan or Canada et al have to commit to a ' Customs Union ' or the ' Single Market /the 4 Freedoms/Pillars ' to get tariff free trade as the EU insist so far the UK should submit too.

Not Spaghetti

Ireland and the so called ' tampon tax ' is a one off for Ireland as European Union countries are barred from creating zero-rated VAT on tampons but Ireland's exemption comes under what is called 'grandfathered. '

In the UK the 5% ' tampon tax ' is distributed to the following charities.:-

The ten projects receiving funding from this round of the Tampon Tax are:

UK Community Foundations £3,400,000 - The Tribewoman project will support vulnerable and excluded women by making onward grants to smaller charities across the UK

Arhag Housing Association £1,040,000 - The BME Women Hub project will alleviate poverty and social exclusion among women in England

Brook Young People £1,500,000 - The ‘Let’s Talk. Period.’ project will aim to address period poverty in England.

Rape Crisis England & Wales £1,400,000 - This digital transformation project is a new approach to tackling sexual violence delivered through member Rape Crisis Centres In England

Women’s Aid Federation of England £1,509,850 - The ‘Ask Me’ project will improve the community response to domestic abuse across the UK and includes onward grants opportunities

Hestia Housing and Support £1,000,000 - The ‘Tools for the Job’ pilot project aims to transform the way that employers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland deal with domestic abuse, by improving their HR policies and delivering awareness raising for staff.

The RCJ & Islington Citizens Advice Bureaux £1,090,488 - The FLOWS project will provide online-tools to improve the capacity of front-line domestic-violence agencies in England to provide legal support to women and children

Mind £1,785,554 - This project will increase the provision of mental health peer support for women experiencing, and at risk of, mental health problems and includes onward grant programme in England and Wales

St. Giles Trust £1,077,158 - The ‘Footsteps’ project aims to improve service provision to women in the Criminal Justice System in England with mental health and complex support needs

One Parent Families Scotland £1,049,590 - This Scotland only project will offer a free support and counselling service for the most disadvantaged, vulnerable and marginalised women most in need.
----

In 2015 David Cameron as MP went to Brussels to try and get the ' tampon tax ' scrapped throughout the 28 EU Member States .

George Osborne in the 2016 Finance Act included legislation to change the rate of VAT to 0% once the EU rules changed. The so called ' tampon tax ' is levied to comply with EU Regulations and as far as I am aware the EU has dragged it's feet over this and no ' Regulation ' change has been passed thus far.

After Brexit it if the UK does not align itself with EU Regulation on the so called ' tampon tax ' then it may well be scrapped as I think ALL parties will back that position.

Lily and others, perhaps this will help: www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47083214 and of course the deal the EU have done with Japan so that they can sell their wine tariff free and buy Japanese cars without paying a tariff. Yes, Japan has said it will try to do a deal with us. Any suggestions what we can export to compare with EU wine?

Sorry Grampie - I was answering your question about why people voted leave and offered the two things I believe were the main drivers.

But if we are talking about the "tampon tax" we should have done as Ireland did all those years ago and not "joined in on it" - no tampon tax in Ireland as they thought these personal hygiene products should be tax exempt.
As for the US - sanitary products are taxed pretty heavily virtually everywhere so I don't think that's necessarily a great example.

I think the NYT post shows what the outside world thinks ,that the plebs are being (mis) led by the "superior" public school set.Sadly thats how it looks from here too.When the clown that is Boris Johnston can be taken seriously by millions over the bus then we have a major problem about the masses being led by the people who have the most to lose by staying IN the EU
.Boris and co had to get the leave vote by fair means or foul...otherwise they have to abide by the new finacial rules that arrived in the EU in January .And so many were taken in by it .Now they are actively getting thesmselves ways to live in the EU (Farage) or moving businesses into the EU JRM ...couldn't make it up could you!!

Yes, Grampie, it's much easier if you can reduce it to a simple word or two that people really don't have to think about.

God forbid that any action should have consequences that need to be considered.

When I walked across the road in front of that car I wasn't intending to get run over. I just wanted to cross the road....

I learned another new word: casuistry.

‘They . . . make the seemingly sensible point that “nobody voted to make themselves poorer”. Of course they didn’t. Nor did they vote to make themselves richer, or anything else. They simply voted to Leave.

Adding extra conditions is casuistry of the worst kind.’

Thanks to Labour MP Graham Stringer.

The EU has given British workers some excellent protection but that seems to be forgotten.

Oh yes, that...

twitter.com/petersuttonimag/status/1091007518917251072

...sent too early
discussion but not going over and over the same ground with links and cut and paste articles from years ago.
I for one am cheesed off with months and years of talk about it all, so I'm not going to comment further.
It's not going to alter any outcome nor change many (if any) minds.
You'd have as much chance of converting the Pope to scientology as changing remainers to leavers.

Urmstongran

It's rather like tennis. Back and forth, serve and volley.The thing is, that remainers (for the most part) will not change their views and vice versa, so why go on and on and on.
Yes, it's good to have a discuss

Lisa 17:53 he looks like an undertaker.

Sigh

It would indeed be good to have a united country, as we were before 2015 when most of us were proud to be UK citizens, proud to be part of the EU, the world's largest and most successful trading bloc, where 28 countries collaborated for the good of all.

At that time less than 10% of the population considered our EU membership to be an important issue.

Then this poison, which we now call "brexit" took hold.

Whether we chose to blame the BBC for its relentless promotion of Nigel Farage (who appeared 27 times on QT, when only one other MEP was ever invited - the brexitexrtreemist Tory Daniel Hannan), or whether you blame the right wing newspapers. owned by foriegn and tax exile billionaires, or whether you blame the smug, entitled complacent David Cameron and his utterly useless successor Theresa May or her equally useless oppsite number Jeremy Corbyn, it does not matter, they are all culpable.

Our once great nation has been split down the middle, become the laughing siock of the world. and may never recover.

We were united before the referendum. This is what saddens me so much. Anna Soubry has been advised by the police not to support the street stall in Nottingham because they can't guarantee her safety. This is what this country has become. And we still need to remember that an MP was murdered 2 years ago.

We all think we have done the correct thing - we all love our families and our Country, please take a deep breath and reflect before posting anything negative.

And here was I GabriellaG54 in a much earlier post thinking we were starting to have some politer discussions, Remainers & Leavers listening to one another a little better.

Trying to understand why we voted as we did, even perhaps doing as the Queen suggested (not that I’m a royalist by a long chalk) .... finding consensus where we can.

We are the U.K.
I just wish we were more united.

It's a good job some of you aren't in the same room after having a few sherberts as the ambulance service would have it's work cut out.
All that chat and it won't make a whit of difference to the outcome. We'll still be out. Best to pour a sherry and put your feet up. Leave politics to the politicians.
Sláinte mhaith

paddyann

Your post @ 16:47:34 from the New York Times is so blatantly misguided and using class warfare to try and prove a point but in return makes it look foolish.

The Referendum gave the ' plebiscite ' the opportunity to have it's say in a democratic vote. There is no ' factual 'evidence to state that this/that or tuther individual from either class/colour/educational attainment voted one way or the other no matter how much people try to spin their web to suit.

Some, certainly not all, Remain campaigners blame the so called intelligent elite on one hand and when it suits the unintelligent menials ( not my opinion) on the other hand for the Referendum result.

It is totally disengenuous.

Oh God , a name calling contest. Fantastic.

Brexshitters/Slime/Xenopbes/Racists/Remoaners/Thick/UnUneducated/ Basket of Deploirables/Contemptuous / Insane et al

Do you keep a spreadsheet of these, POGS? Perhaps you should modify it to keep a record of who said it and how many times every word you find offensive has been used. Ooh, and how many times a poster has posted so we know what percentage of their posts contain the offending words...

Then perhaps we could make objective judgements. hmm.
--

No I don't keep a spreadsheet but I do remember posts and certain threads stick in my mind and as YOU want to make an ' objective judgement ' and are taking my post to task perhaps you need to look at your own track record again.

You Maizie d have used the word Brexshitters and used the term ' in bed with racists ' to have a go at those who voted Leave.

Matthew Parris, writing in the right-wing "Spectator" refers to the threat that there will be civil unrest if brexit is not "delivered"-

"Barry Gardiner, Labour’s shadow secretary of state for international trade, resisting the idea of a second referendum on the Today programme last year. ‘You never give as much succour to the extreme right as when you cut off the mechanism of democratic change,’ Mr Gardiner said. If Brexit were overturned, people (not him!) could ‘turn to other, more socially disruptive ways of expressing their views, and that is the danger here’.

This is disreputable. Make no mistake: whatever the protestations of those who wave in our face the possibility of social unrest, they are helping to talk it up. ‘Support May’s deal or people will riot!’ This is silly, irresponsible talk. Imagine you’re one of these thugs on the British far-right, and you hear IDS tell the BBC that if we allow a further referendum we could get something like the gilets jaunes here

in Britain. Can you doubt it would quicken the pulse of certain troublemakers? Nobody is more encouraged than the barbarians to hear the cry ‘the barbarians are at the gates!’

And there is to me something deeply un-Conservative about this tack. A proper Conservative does not pray in aid of his argument by citing criminal elements that may otherwise be unleashed. Who would have looked kindly on those who told us to give ground to the IRA lest we offer them reason to bomb us?
So can there ever be a morally respectable case for using predictions of civil unrest as an argument against a proposed policy? Undoubtedly. The dividing line between the reputable and the disreputable use of ‘the mob won’t stand for it’ is the imminence or otherwise, and the certainty or otherwise, of the predicted disorder.

When Margaret Thatcher’s poll tax was first mooted, opponents on the left would have been disreputable to predict riots in Trafalgar Square if this passed into law. Nobody then had good reason to know disorder was likely, and such talk would have helped fuel the very response of which it warned. But later, when it was clear that order was close to breaking down in demonstrations against the tax, and the reform was bitterly and angrily disliked by tens of millions of people, it became only reasonable to remind policymakers of what was looming.
How imminent, then, and how certain would we judge widespread civil disorder to be, if MPs opt for a new test of public opinion on Brexit, three years after the first one? I cannot even begin to construct a case for forecasting this with confidence. Far more people have demonstrated against Brexit than for it, so far. Where and who are these imagined rioters in the north of England, smashing windows to stop a democratic test of public opinion (or to protest against its result)?

My best guess is there would be anger for a while, though probably not on the scale triggered by the Iraq war, and on nothing like the scale triggered by Mrs Thatcher’s battle with the coal miners. The culprits would be the usual suspects, whipped up by the usual suspects. And within a year or two it would all pass."

www.spectator.co.uk/2019/02/those-who-warn-of-brexit-civil-unrest-are-inviting-it/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_content=020219_Weekly_Highlights_05&utm_campaign=Weekly_Highlights

Thanks Lisa never seen that before!

Nonnie

I think it does matter what countries voted for because, with Ireland, Brexit could bring back 'the troubles', Scotland ruled out independence because it didn't want to leave the EU, and Gibraltar are actually in 'Europe' itself and people work, shop etc on both sides of the border on a daily basis. And yet, their valid reasons for voting remain are being totally ignored by parliament.

For those who ask how we know that the majority in the UK want to remain in the UK-

whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/?removed

You will see that the Leavers have polled less than the Remainers on every poll for the last two years. The average of the last six polls gave Remain an 8% lead.