Special place in hell

[motorbiking]

I don't see a problem with holding referendum on an idea without a plan, or even campaigning on the positives. I do have a problem with triggering the leave process without a clear strategy. However, it was the EU who said there can be no discussions on a deal until after A50, so they pretty much held a gun to our heads.

I think Tusk had hoped that a chaotic Brexit, would make us think again. I don't think public opinion has changed enough to secure that and he's now given up.

 

[noseall]

campaigning on the positives.

Were there any positives that didn't turn out to be lies?

 

[motorbiking]

We haven't done it yet, so who knows.. There have been plenty of negatives that turned out to be incorrect:

Donald Tusk, said western political civilisation would be destroyed if the UK voted 'Leave’.
David Cameron implied in a speech about the "serried rows of white headstones" that World War 3 would be upon us if Brexit occurred.
George Osborne predicted tax rises and spending cuts would be implemented.
There would be an immediate Brexit recession.
3 million people in the UK will lose their jobs
David Cameron said he wouldn't resign as Prime Minister if he lost the Referendum vote.

 

[tony1851]

Were there any positives that didn't turn out to be lies?

Following on from an earlier post, here are another two plans written by Leavers:

in 2016, Business for Britain wrote 'Change or Go' (a plan 1000 pages long) and back in 2014, Broomfield and Murray wrote 'Cutting the Gordian knot: A road map for British exit from the European Union'.

So despite your claim, there were plans produced around that time for leaving the EU. It's just that Remainers hijacked the process by installing Remainer May as PM.

 

[sodthisforfun]

True Leavers have never been given the reins.

Who are these people?

 

[gasbusters]

It's just that Remainers hijacked the process by installing Remainer May as PM.

Not really. Only a year later there was a general election, May won, all be it with a vastly reduced majority. The people therefore chose May to lead us through this Brexit process.

 

[durhamplumber]

Not really. Only a year later there was a general election, May won, all be it with a vastly reduced majority. The people therefore chose May to lead us through this Brexit process.

Indeed.Corbynisters cannot be a,,sed with leaving bed to vote.

 

[tony1851]

Not really. Only a year later there was a general election, May won, all be it with a vastly reduced majority. The people therefore chose May to lead us through this Brexit process.

Agreed, but May always was a Remainer at heart. The Tories chose her after Cameron quit because their Leave-faction was taken in by her blandishments.

 

[SirGalahad]

Sorry, Nose, but you've been asleep; the ERG has published a detailed and comprehensive plan for leaving - it's here:

Which have you read?

pg3

The Government will immediately table legal text to amend the Withdrawal Agreement to replace the backstop with a permanent solution capable of delivering an invisible and compliant border in Ireland under either WTO rules or an FTA, using administrative procedures and current technology

That's a complete fabrication.

pg4

The replacement Irish border protocol will be based on an interim FTA in goods and agri-food, with a chapter on Customs and Trade Facilitation, and Irish Border Facilitations

Where is this Interim FTA?

The rest isn't even a plan as it's just statement of intent - a plan has specifics, deliverables, timelines, resource requirements etc - this is nothing.

 

[SirGalahad]

I don't see a problem with holding referendum on an idea without a plan, or even campaigning on the positives. I do have a problem with triggering the leave process without a clear strategy. However, it was the EU who said there can be no discussions on a deal until after A50, so they pretty much held a gun to our heads.

I think Tusk had hoped that a chaotic Brexit, would make us think again. I don't think public opinion has changed enough to secure that and he's now given up.

Gun to our heads? How so. We wanted formal discussions with the EU so the EU needed some sort of framework which required A50?

Cameron himself said if Leave won then A50 should be invoked by the new PM.

 

[SirGalahad]

We haven't done it yet, so who knows.. There have been plenty of negatives that turned out to be incorrect:

Donald Tusk, said western political civilisation would be destroyed if the UK voted 'Leave’.
David Cameron implied in a speech about the "serried rows of white headstones" that World War 3 would be upon us if Brexit occurred.
George Osborne predicted tax rises and spending cuts would be implemented.
There would be an immediate Brexit recession.
3 million people in the UK will lose their jobs
David Cameron said he wouldn't resign as Prime Minister if he lost the Referendum vote.

This was before the referendum, and when we leave we shall see. Companies are shifting their resources and repositioning themselves. I fail to see how that benefits the UK economy.

In what way do you think Brexit will benefit the economy?

 

[durhamplumber]

In what way do you think Brexit will benefit the economy?

For the 1000 time,,,we shall see,,regardless.

 

[motorbiking]

I see no reason assuming the right level of good will, not to have a fully agreed leave settlement prior to A50 including post leave trade agreement- allowing the 2 years as an implementation phase.

That was not possible. I don’t understand why - anyone?

 

[SirGalahad]

I see no reason assuming the right level of good will, not to have a fully agreed leave settlement prior to A50 including post leave trade agreement- allowing the 2 years as an implementation phase.

That was not possible. I don’t understand why - anyone?

Assumes we knew what we wanted and parliament agreed.

When we want all benefits of the SM bar one and then no hard border in Ireland, not even a JRR Tolkien fantasy novel is that far fetched.

 

[JohnD]

That was not possible. I don’t understand why - anyone?

The Brexers are currently very hung up on the Irish Border problem.

That's because they want something that is impossible.

They have no solution to the problem.

If they did, they wouldn't worry about the backstop because it would never come into force.