Leavers’ views on the deal please.

I haven't read the 500plus pages!

Me neither!!!

from what I gather, the only point that worries me is the ability to end the transition phase. I understand that we are unable to determine it and it is at the whim of the EU.
They would prefer us bound and helpless as long as possible, a visible deterrent to such as Greece and Italy and any others thinking about leaving.
In which case the deal is critically flawed to the point that we will be worse off than if we had a cliff edge no deal.
This "final" deal is an accumalation of the results of negotiations, where we gained nothing and suffered concession after concession with May claiming each one in turn as a "victory".
This latest deal is the ultimate and damning concession and is poisonous to remainers, fence sitters and leavers alike.
May has gained admiration as a resilient person, fair enough, but that does not make her an effective politician or negotiator. She has failed to grasp any nettles and we are all to be stung now because of that.

I saw an interview this morning on the beeb with Nadhim Zahawi and, without the benefit of his in depth knowledge of the deal of course agree with his view of the deal.

Compromises and concessions have been made on both sides and neither side is completely happy with the result as neither side has got everything they wanted.

Neither remainers or leavers will be totally satisfied and neither will the EU.

As a leaver I'm 50/50. IMO TM has done the best she can. No one could have done better and if she's forced out of office there is no one to replace her, from any party, who could achieve a better deal.

Just seen this on Mr. S.'s FB "And then, Barnier said to May 'How many Brexiteers does it take to change a light bulb? One to promise a brighter future and the rest to screw it up'".

Apologies, I posted the following in the wrong thread, so I will repost it once again here.

Post follows:-
Dominic Raab, he who resigned as Brexit Secretary last week, was on the BBC Andrew Marr programme today (18/11/28) and advised on why he had resigned over the brexit deal that he has had a hand in negotiating. When Andrew Marr pressed him on the present deal being rejected in Parliament may well lead to a "no deal exit" with Britain crashing out of the European Union, Dominic Raab really demonstrated his total ignorance in regard to Britain's cross-border trading with the European Union.

In the above, Dominic Raab glibly advised that should there be problems at the port of Dover; then trucks could be switched the ports of Dunkirk or even Amsterdam. In that, does he not realise that the road hauliers that continually go backwards and forwards from this country to the continent have contracts with the ferry and port companies which they could just not walk away from.

Also , it would be very probable that the shipping Lines would not just be able to switch their ships from operating from Dover and Calais to another port at very short notice. The port of Dunkirk most certainly would not be able to handle a sudden increase in the number of trucks and ships it handles however much the requirement may be, with Amsterdam being in much the same position especially as it is set up to handle containers rather than roll-on roll-off trucks.

It also seemed to escape Dominic Raab's perception that both of the above ports are in the European Union and therefore the same checks and delays are likely to occur to free movement there as much as they would at port of Dover.

I believe the above demonstrates how much this conservative government are out of touch with the realities of Britain's cross-border traffic with the European Union which have been built up over 40 years.

I found Dominic Raab's interview and comments on the Andrew Marr programme today, absolutely laughable

Satisfaction. As a remainer I don't like the deal one bit, we have to accept EU rules without any say in negotiating them, so I'm with the Brexiteers on that point. I'm sure the EU are very satisfied with it because they have a veto on UK leaving the customs union, this could go on indefinitely.

The trade negotiations which begin in April, unless there is an extension to article 50, will be hamstrung because that veto means the EU could just keep saying no to everything. We would be entirely dependant on their good will but in reality we will end up with an EFTA deal very similar to Norway. In my mind that is significantly worse than being a full member as we are now, because in reality we have to accept their rules and standards, full member or not.

TM seems determined to push the "deal" through parliament, so how far can she go?, can she ignore a vote against the deal and survive a vote of "no confidence".

The deal is scarily dreadful.

We have been left with little option! This Govt. failed to draw up any plans or it would seem any statements of the possible outcomes. I do find it quite scary that so many people seem to think we would be better to 'crash out' of the EU. We cannot just start trading with other nations - we will have to negotiate deals and follow the WTO. I gather that this could take months if not years. And, one of the countries who vetoed our just being accepted into the WTO was the USA. So much for our 'special relationship'. We shall not get anything from them!!

Dreadful deal - would rather no deal, feel as though TM has done this deliberately as she has always been a Remainer. Angry and disgusted.

I thought the idea of this thread was to hear the views of leavers.
So is it OK that self proclaimed remainers are offering comment?
Surely they could start their own thread and not distort this one.

We've been a member of WTO since 1st Jan 1995. Member of GATT since Jan 1st 1948! We can trade under WTO without any permission from anyone,

Since 1995 in our own right,not just as EU members.

Why do so many still believe we have to implement Brexit in any form? It is no longer what we voted for in 2016.
It is more now looking about a dangerous adopted option that is frankly a sheer uncertain gamble with today’s & next generations futures. How can we adopt such a deal that fails to resolve the NI issues instead it’s creating danger of NI annexe from UK?
If we stay in the EU we can then at least seek changes at the table that moves closer to eliminating many of our concerns, at the same time safeguard many of the high standard regulation we do like and benefit from including fair mobile calls etc.
We must not take an uncertain leap into the unknown with so little safeguards, why should we gamble on a Brexit that could turn out to be nothing more than a terrible horror story. I want full factual information rather than taking unnecessary risks in my grandchildren’s future. So I want to stay in the Eu but work to improve it.

It would seem that many Brexitiers still do not realise or do not wish to accept that even if Britain crashes out of European Union in a "no deal" scenario, then the Northern Ireland border problem would still very much exist.

That may well start the war once again in the province with the threat of that spreading to the mainland. Just as it is with the ports, so it is with the Northern Ireland issue, another matter that the leave campaign failed to point out to the electorate during the referendum campaign.

Nobody's stopping those who voted leave from voicing their opinion as to the deal.

MarthaBeck
If we stay in the EU we can then at least seek changes at the table that moves closer to eliminating many of our concerns, at the same time safeguard many of the high standard regulations

Why did Cameron call a referendum? Because he was overruled on every point when he tried to facilitate change to some of the 'problems' with the EU, despite it being a 'union' every country is working for their own best interest and for those receiving billions in funds (or the current dysfunctional system is working to their benefit), why would they vote for change? The Eastern European countries have most to lose from UK. These countries are receiving some of the largest amounts of funds, their nationals have been the greatest benefitters of free movement. Would these countries agree to UK (as the third largest contributor) removing these funds or reducing the free movement of their nationals who repatriate millions back home in remittances? no they will want to maintain the status quo.
Will Germany and the other larger continutors cough up the shortfall in funds when UK leaves? I doubt it, a number of the other EU member states have already stated they too will not make up the shortfall, this will potentially result in a reduced budget resulting in further stagnation of the EU. This is why leaving is proving so difficult.
Those who talk about free movement should realise we have always had controlled movement throughout the Continent of Europe. How did the Italians settle in Wales and Scotland, how did Gracie Fields get to Capri? Even one of my uncles settled in Spain and that must have been in 1950's. We used to have French onion sellers coming around on their bikes, any change in this would just be sour grapes.

I can understand why the EU is making life tough for TM, and for all of us - they do not want any other country to go the same route.

The deal as it stands is, as the EU well know, much to our disadvantage. I think that is what it is meant to be. Very disturbing.

I thought the DUP had already decided, they were going to ignore it.
If the Republic of Ireland wish to enforce it its up to them, thinking about it, it might work too.

Grandad1943
That may well start the war once again in the province with the threat of that spreading to the mainland. Just as it is with the ports, so it is with the Northern Ireland issue, another matter that the leave campaign failed to point out to the electorate during the referendum campaign.

Don't panic, don't panic! Your frequent inferences to conflict makes one wonder if this is a desire of yours to confirm your 'concerns'. As far as i am aware you are the only one who raises this issue.

Am I the only leaver that's responded here stree?

I understand as a leaver that the Northern Ireland problem will still exist Grandad and IMO the deal, less than perfect I agree is far better than Northern Ireland being annexed from the UK.

That said, it doesn't automatically mean that the troubles will begin once again. I do wish that some wouldn't assume that those of us who voted or Brexit, failed to consider the pro's and the cons before voting.

I agree Morgana that this deal is better than no deal and if we do end up leaving with no deal it will be due to the MP's who vote against it but don't appear to have anything of consequence to offer as alternative.

Davidhs, the European Union would have to reinstate a hard border in Ireland on a no deal Brexit to prevent the possibility of substandard goods entering the EU via that border. The EU would also wish to collect the tariffs on freight crossing into the European Union again via that border.

However, It would matter little who reinstated the border, the IRA in the North would, without doubt, use that as a means to restart the troubles.

I would rather stay in the EU than accept the deal on the table.
I am aware that if we stayed then a huge amount of money and negotiation will have been wasted. It seems to me that we are at the mercy of the EU if we accept this deal and that is not acceptable.
If we stay in the union we live to fight another day, if we accept this then we have no chance.
Are we to believe that the Irish people are just waiting for the chance to start killing one another again?

Grandad.
Correct, goods would need to be formally checked which would stop smuggling (some of it anyway). There is free movement of people now, that will continue, ROI won't like it but DUP don't care. War no.