|
Post by Tim on Jun 14, 2017 10:28:04 GMT
Can anyone tell me what the supposed benefits of a so-called Hard Brexit would be?
As far as I can tell we would have no trade deals in place, no freedom of movement, no involvement in the market.
The 'advantage' (as seen by those pushing for it) would be complete control of how many people we allowed into the country - they appear to want it below 100k, ignoring the fact that it appears that we need 200-300k net immigration.
It can't be that limited surely?
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 14, 2017 10:42:27 GMT
Hard Brexit, or Brexit as it is better known, would be leaving the European Union, single market, customs union and European courts jurisdiction. We wouldn't be sending large amounts of money to Europe. We would be better able to control some migrations, such as the free movement of people from Europe and also those who come from outside Europe but could claim residence through the right to family mechanism governed by the ECJ. We'd also be free to agree our own free trade deals. They are the theoretical upsides. Theoretical doing a lot of work there.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 14, 2017 10:45:43 GMT
Trade deals with third party (i.e. non-EU) nations is one of the carrion calls. At the moment we are restricted in this respect by EU wide deals and regulations.
That and, I understand from the beliefs of many Brexiteers, being able to destroy the Spanish Armada and engage the French in battle at Waterloo periodically.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 14, 2017 11:09:41 GMT
Control of our borders, better trade deals with non EU countries and the ability to decide for ourselves what laws and regulations we have in the UK are the only up sides as I see it.
On the other side of the coin we have worse trade deals with EU countries, 3 hour waits in all European airports at customs, applying EU laws in any case otherwise we can't sell anything to them, immigration because no-one here will do half the jobs required and no-one will like us any more!
All hypothetically of course.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2017 11:21:21 GMT
I can think of more than a few EU companies that would lose out in a bad deal. It is in the interests of the EU as well as the UK to have a fair deal.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 14, 2017 11:23:15 GMT
I can think of more than a few EU companies that would lose out in a bad deal. It is in the interests of the EU as well as the UK to have a fair deal. As you've suggested elsewhere, that would be the UK thinking itself as more important and influential than it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2017 11:25:01 GMT
How so? Both sides are important in the deal process, are you saying the EU is more important?
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 14, 2017 11:27:46 GMT
No, I'm suggesting the the UK has more to loose than the EU. We loose 27 customers they loose one.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jun 14, 2017 12:10:00 GMT
Can anyone tell me what the supposed benefits of a so-called Hard Brexit would be?
If that was a question on QI the answer would be the sound bite of someone saying "nobody knows". I've given up arguing about Brexit, the whole situation we've sleepwalked into has turned into little more than a farce and Nigel's promised domino effect of other European nations following suit is about as likely as Russian nuclear disarmament!
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 14, 2017 13:11:50 GMT
Hmmm it's sort of what I expected then.
A small handful of people want a hard Brexit to the general detriment of, lets say, the majority of the population and they're going to do whatever they can to get it. David Cameron really made a balls up of trying to control the most extreme part of the Tories didn't he.
I suspect that if you reran the referendum and the choice was 1) vote for Brexit OR 2) vote to leave, accept immigration at current levels and we'll give you £5,000 then option 2 would be the popular choice.
My feeling about a hard Brexit is that the 'average' people who voted to leave could easily end up 10-20% worse off. They wouldn't've chosen that if the alternative had been letting a few foreigners in.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jul 3, 2017 20:33:44 GMT
If anyone wants more detailed info on Brexit and implications for business from a studiously neutral legal perspective, we have set up a "Brexit Toolkit" microsite which is getting very good reviews.
I prefer not to put a direct link on here and would prefer not to name-check the firm (and please don't if you reply to this), but if you google "Brexit Toolkit", it's the second (and third) hit. Hope it may be useful.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 3, 2017 20:49:55 GMT
Does it feature the words shitstorm or fuck-up?
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jul 3, 2017 21:26:24 GMT
I've bookmarked that for a read when I have some more time thank you.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jul 4, 2017 12:15:47 GMT
What beats me about Brexit is that, when Cameron decided to put it to the people at a referendum, there were only 2 possible outcomes: Stay in - in which case nothing needed to be done, status quo Get out - in which case...... the government appeared not to have made any plans or done any research into what the effects would be, and all the myriad of actions that would be required. Why hadn't they got a clue what to do if the vote went this way, which it did?
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jul 4, 2017 12:18:15 GMT
Does it feature the words shitstorm or fuck-up? I presume that it's not the site to which you don't want us to post a link later?
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jul 4, 2017 12:22:43 GMT
What beats me about Brexit is that, when Cameron decided to put it to the people at a referendum, there were only 2 possible outcomes: Stay in - in which case nothing needed to be done, status quo Get out - in which case...... the government appeared not to have made any plans or done any research into what the effects would be, and all the myriad of actions that would be required. Why hadn't they got a clue what to do if the vote went this way, which it did? Well I think most people were led down the garden path of thinking it was a simple in/out choice and if enough people voted leave they would wake up the next morning not in the EU and with no more immigrants coming over. I do not recall any mention of free trade deals, article 50 or the common market during the referendum campaign. But then perhaps too many of the campaigners didn't think it would actually happen.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jul 4, 2017 12:35:00 GMT
The interesting thing for me is that I have not met one person who voted out that regrets their decision or would vote differently if offered the chance again. Then again I don't suppose I would change my decision either.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jul 4, 2017 13:01:03 GMT
The interesting thing for me is that I have not met one person who voted out that regrets their decision or would vote differently if offered the chance again. Then again I don't suppose I would change my decision either. Fair comment well made. We're a funny lot, the English (specifically the English!): we tend to roll up our sleeves and say "that's what it is, let's get on with it". The French would have burned a few cars the day after the referendum.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jul 4, 2017 13:01:21 GMT
The interesting thing for me is that I have not met one person who voted out that regrets their decision or would vote differently if offered the chance again.
That's understandable because at the moment there is no change to their money or environment, however they might feel differently in 3 or 4 years time if we have no trade deals and the £350M per week isn't getting spent on the NHS!
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jul 4, 2017 14:21:11 GMT
I personally can't abide the "oh well, I didn't vote for it, but the majority voted for it, so we had better get on with it" approach to a Hard Brexit.
Let's imagine a group of you are standing with your families at the entrance to a deep cave. The cave is dark and doesn't look especially inviting, but there's several persuasive people in your group who assure everyone that there is nothing scary lurking in the darkened recesses of the cave and that in fact they believe that it leads to Eldorado.
So your group hold a vote and a decision is made to enter the cave and reach Eldorado. However, just before you all enter, some ghastly screams and roars emanate from deep inside the cave, and some passing locals warn you not to go into the cave because there is a fearsome man-eating beast roaming its depths.
At the same time, when pressed on the topic, those in your group who told you that Eldorado lies at the other end of the cave shrug their shoulders and say "well, we like to think it does, but we have no actual proof of any sort".
Which special sort of muppet would at that point say "oh well, I didn't vote for it, but the majority voted for it, so we had better get on with it" and is prepared to walk into the cave with their family?
It's completely insane.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 4, 2017 14:23:47 GMT
What if the screams and roars could also be heard from outside the cave too?
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jul 4, 2017 15:14:37 GMT
Ha, goes to show you can spin it any which way.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jul 4, 2017 15:35:37 GMT
I personally can't abide the "oh well, I didn't vote for it, but the majority voted for it, so we had better get on with it" approach to a Hard Brexit. Let's imagine a group of you are standing with your families at the entrance to a deep cave. The cave is dark and doesn't look especially inviting, but there's several persuasive people in your group who assure everyone that there is nothing scary lurking in the darkened recesses of the cave and that in fact they believe that it leads to Eldorado. So your group hold a vote and a decision is made to enter the cave and reach Eldorado. However, just before you all enter, some ghastly screams and roars emanate from deep inside the cave, and some passing locals warn you not to go into the cave because there is a fearsome man-eating beast roaming its depths. At the same time, when pressed on the topic, those in your group who told you that Eldorado lies at the other end of the cave shrug their shoulders and say "well, we like to think it does, but we have no actual proof of any sort". Which special sort of muppet would at that point say "oh well, I didn't vote for it, but the majority voted for it, so we had better get on with it" and is prepared to walk into the cave with their family? It's completely insane. Really? Racing? Is this what the argument's come down to - caves and Eldorado and screams? That's weak by anyone's standards. But sticking with caves: Let's imagine you're in a cave with your family and the walls are closing in so you take a vote to leave the cave - it may be safer out there, it may be less safe, but the majority want to leave as they know they don't want to risk staying... These analogies make no sense and just make those of us who voted Remain look stupid!
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jul 4, 2017 16:57:30 GMT
Yes, really.
FYP "Let's imagine you're in a cave with your family and somebody screams that the walls are closing in, so you take a vote to leave the cave - it may be safer out there, it may be less safe, but the majority want to leave despite not checking whether the walls actually are closing in..."
It was not in any way sensible.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 4, 2017 17:03:05 GMT
I'm obviously playing devils advocate here but I'd suggest people did check. They saw immigration as an issue amongst other things and decided that the walls were closing in so it's time to get out. The most damning thing about this is that the same message has and is being repeated across Europe but the people are being ignored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2017 17:03:18 GMT
After the previous referendum I can remember people saying, "Well, everyone else was going to vote stay so I did". It sounded stupid then but there is nowt so queer as folk or as near as makes no difference.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jul 4, 2017 20:11:05 GMT
I'm obviously playing devils advocate here but I'd suggest people did check. They saw immigration as an issue amongst other things and decided that the walls were closing in so it's time to get out. The most damning thing about this is that the same message has and is being repeated across Europe but the people are being ignored. Yes, although to counter in the DA role, so much of the immigration and lack of cultural integration that many people are fussed about seems to be from outside Europe...or often enough the fuss seems to come from people whose reason to be fussed about immigration isn't immediately apparent.
I put quite a chunk of it down to inherent human suspicion of strangers. I know that's an unfashionable "elitist" view but so be it.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 4, 2017 20:19:35 GMT
The ECJ does influence immigration from outside Europe through right to a family. It's not a fashionable view that we need immigration and I'm sure we are both beneficiaries with me having lived on the continent and your marriage. Others don't see it quite that way and I won't dismiss that. My frustration is if the EU had tabled an offer to end or substantially limit free movement or restrict benefits we wouldn't be where we are and other European countries wouldn't have seen the rise of far right groups.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jul 5, 2017 9:56:05 GMT
My frustration is if the EU had tabled an offer to end or substantially limit free movement or restrict benefits we wouldn't be where we are and other European countries wouldn't have seen the rise of far right groups.
The first part of this is a very valid point - if the EU had made some concessions when David Cameron went to see them we'd probably be staying. However, I suspect the EU thought along the same lines as many people did in that they never expected a Leave vote to get anywhere near success.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jul 5, 2017 10:15:15 GMT
However, I suspect the EU thought along the same lines as many people did in that they never expected a Leave vote to get anywhere near success.
Which just shows them up to be selfish, unwilling to listen to other people's concerns and prepared to use their collective power to put down any form of protest or criticism.
I would still happily remain part of the EU because I believe that it best serves our interests and future. However, no matter how strong the protests or arguments, I don't see how we can overturn the referendum result. In the cave example you could always turn round and say I am not going in there. Unfortunately this is a bit more like being aboard a ship, in shark infested waters, which has turned directly into the path of a hurricane. Unless there is a mutiny, that's where we are heading and there's no getting off.
|
|