Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ironic, coming from a keyboard warrior.

I presented a massive post with loads of points contradicting a lot said in the last few days and got the response "But the leave vote won though", as @roydo can surely confirm. It's pointless to present you with actual arguments when you ignore them, so I'm regressing into a stupid state of pointless random replies.

Inb4 getting called a reamoaner again or some other crap again as a refute

You and others simply cannot accept the legal vote of the referendum, and argue ad infinitum on what has happened, what is hapening, and what will happen (without having a clue HOW the future will shape up). It is tedious, and you don't see how boring it is coming from you all, and on another level, how humorous it is...

Sad really. Never ever seen the kind of angst from 'Remain' supporters anywhere else on forums...
 
(without having a clue HOW the future will shape up)

Think thats one of the main reasons some of us voted to stay mate.

Unlike some who were seduced by the utter tripe served up by the Leave campaign. Well, both campaigns to be fair. But one would assume the winning campaign seduced more than the losing one did.

You Ok with Parliament voting on the final deal by the way?
 
1. Think thats one of the main reasons some of us voted to stay mate.

2. Unlike some who were seduced by the utter tripe served up by the Leave campaign. Well, both campaigns to be fair. But one would assume the winning campaign seduced more than the losing one did.

3. You Ok with Parliament voting on the final deal by the way?


A reasoned post, that I will provide reasoned replies to.

1. I see that (the unknown future) as being a fear factor, and a desire to maintain the status quo rather than look to the future and its possibilities. Perhaps those of my generation (and I do not mean this to be flippant or arrogant in any way), whose teen years were in the 1960s were exposed to incredible change (just contrast the years 1960 & 1970) and therefore, I would venture to suggest, more amenable to changes in society. I don't think the younger generation (say those born from 1995 onwards) have gone through the same step change(s) that my generation has. Not everything was rosy, believe me. The Vietnam war, and the Soviet Union's invasion of Czechoslovakia particularly had me and others I know crapping ourselves in case it all kicked off (West v. East) and conscription reared its ugly head for a full-on war again.

2. As I have posted before, there may be some who WERE seduced by the tripe/outright lies by the leave campaign. I saw that and do not deny it. But I also saw the same from the remain campaign. And I reasoned things out and came to my own decision as to how I was going to vote. I actually believe (and this is only my personal opinion) that if Cameron had not issued that booklet advocating remain, and the cost to the taxpayers in having it produced being declared at £9.5 million, remain might actually have won. I think a lot of people were disgusted that he had used his position to utilise what can only be seen as neutral Treasury funds to advance his 'remain' position. Certainly all those I spoke to openly said it was a disgrace and abuse of power. In one fell swoop, Cameron may have fatally compromised the remain vote...

3. I've stated my case on this before, roydo. The referendum was one part of the overall process. The result (either way) was then passed on to the legislature to move forward with. If that involves Parliamentary discussion concerning matters surrounding the final deal, which I believe (in my simplicity) means Parliament deciding on whether the final negotiating position of the EU on the complete gamut of matters is acceptable or not, then I have to go along with the Parliamentary process. If that results in the acceptance of EU terms, so be it; if it means we tell them to go chase themselves, and we proceed as we determine, so be it. I have to say that having dealt with MPs during my time in the civil service, they have scared the crap out of me on many occasions for their lack of understanding of basic issues put before them.

I hope all of the foregiong explains things in details for you, although I understand you may not necessarily accept all of my points.
 
I understand you may not necessarily accept all of my points.

Indeed I do mate. Well put, and I fully agree with the generational issue.

I said when the vote was done,that I hoped all would pull together and get it done well. Unfortunately, my concerns about the ability of the UK parliament to actually resist the chance to score political points and settle political differences have, so far, been vindicated.

So, we are at an empass. Those of your persuasion are seemingly convinced all will work out just fine. Others, of my persuasion, said, why take the risk?
 
I said when the vote was done,that I hoped all would pull together and get it done well. Unfortunately, my concerns about the ability of the UK parliament to actually resist the chance to score political points and settle political differences have, so far, been vindicated.

So, we are at an empass. Those of your persuasion are seemingly convinced all will work out just fine. Others, of my persuasion, said, why take the risk?

First paragraph: I've seen more reasonable movements made at Chester Zoo in the chimpanzee enclosure than I have seen in Parliament sometimes! :D

Second paragraph: I think those of my persuasion and age have seen so much over the decades (the 60s as I mentioned earlier, and we battled through the Thatcher years, however tough it was, and if you didn't live through it [not you personally, roydo, that's a general 'you'], believe me, it was tough, but we came out the other side). Part of what I was, and still am, appalled at, was the total non-preparation by Cameron for the eventuality of a leave vote. If directed by the PM to plan for both eventualities, senior civil servants would have had at least outline plans, if not more, for either outcome. As far as we know, no such planning was instituted, which is somewhat remiss (and I'm being gentle here) of those in power at the time...
 
We should do a Catalonia. England, Wales and perhaps Northern Ireland should just declare Independence from the new U.K. (Scotland), the EU will immediately throw us out, Scotland can then stay in the EU and pick up the tab for any monies owing by the U.K. to the EU........
 
You and others simply cannot accept the legal vote of the referendum, and argue ad infinitum on what has happened, what is hapening, and what will happen (without having a clue HOW the future will shape up). It is tedious, and you don't see how boring it is coming from you all, and on another level, how humorous it is...

Sad really. Never ever seen the kind of angst from 'Remain' supporters anywhere else on forums...
Classic response. We argue about what has happened because you guys keep bringing it up. "Oh we used to give X gorillion Great British Pounds to the EU", which isn't true and it's been pointed out many times, yet remains a vital point apparently.

You're absolutely mental if you think it will just be pink clouds and rainbows, and, with all due respect, you have even less of a clue how it will shape up as everything that's not said by May is apparently a lie or made up by dat dem remoaners lad.
 
1. Classic response. We argue about what has happened because you guys keep bringing it up. "Oh we used to give X gorillion Great British Pounds to the EU", which isn't true and it's been pointed out many times, yet remains a vital point apparently.

2. You're absolutely mental if you think it will just be pink clouds and rainbows, and, with all due respect, you have even less of a clue how it will shape up as everything that's not said by May is apparently a lie or made up by dat dem remoaners lad.

1. On the contrary, it's the likes of you who voted remain who continue to rattle on about every issue under the sun, and then get butthurt (to use a quaint American expression) when there is a response which does not comply with your views.

2. There you go again with abusing me (saying I am absolutely mental), even if you do qualify it with the word 'if'. Sorry to disappoint you, but I am not absolutely mental. I post valid premises and reasons; you stoop to personal abuse. Take a look at how a reasoned discussion works, such as I have had with roydo. It's actually on this page.
 
The second point I've not seen much of that when I post anything, but then again it's been mostly Pete and not y'self that I've tried to have a discussion with here.

On the first point - beyond pointless to tell you the same things again, so I shan't, as it's gonna end up in a disagreement anyway. "Every issue under the sun" is a pretty good way of putting it, as there are a lot, and us getting butthurt (kudos for the use of that, a very good American expression really lol ) is probably because we rarely, if ever, get anything that's not "you don't know though lоl" and "but the leave vote won so koff" back. "reasoned discussion" indeed.
 
And so, after another days debate and voting, the government defeats another raft of amendments......

Yea, let's go and get wankered together and celebrate Pete! I'm busy pouring loads of chemicals into the water table currently, i'll get changed and set alight to a load of tyres before I wander over to yours around three-ish :)

Can't wait to take the piss out of the pleb's that have to actually work for other people mate!

Brexit debate: Some ministers are 'not fond' of workers' rights, warns senior Tory MP Ken Clarke
It came as the Government avoided any serious backbench rebellion after a series of amendments to the bill were voted down by MPs in the Commons on Wednesday evening
 
Christ:

Lack of Government contingency planning risks Brexit border chaos
ImageVaultHandler.aspx.jpg

16 November 2017
In its report, the Home Affairs Committee raises serious concerns about the Government’s contingency planning for post-Brexit customs operations and warns major border disruption could ensue unless urgent action is taken.



Maintaining operational status quo
The report notes that maintaining the operational status quo for customs arrangements and remaining in the customs union would cause the least upheaval at the border and deliver certainty for business. The Government should aim to swiftly agree transitional arrangements with the EU which involve no practical change to customs operations either in the UK or the EU, and especially at the Irish border.

The Committee specifically warns of the risks if no deal is secured, which would result in customs in the UK experiencing a huge amount of change in a very short time, with a vast increase required in capacity and processes at the border.

Delays and traffic jams at ports
The report warns that rapid changes and a failure to plan could see the UK facing delays and traffic jams at ports similar to those experienced in July 2015 when French ferry operators went on strike and Operation Stack was implemented to ease major problems.

It warns that any change to customs arrangements after March 2019 will require similar investment and planning at the EU side of the border - especially in France, Belgium and Ireland or there will be serious delays for UK exports.

The Committee raises concerns that a 4% increase in Border Force staff is too small as they carry out customs checks in many ports. The report warns of the risk of Border Force being diverted from security and immigration checks into customs checks and emphasises that security must not be put at risk by government failure to plan.

The Committee welcomes proposals to use the approved operators scheme but calls for action to accredit more businesses now.

Insufficient contingency planning
The Committee warns that insufficient contingency planning has been done for Britain leaving the EU with no deal. The report today calls on the Government to publish detailed plans on the impact on Britain’s customs arrangements of all potential outcomes of the Brexit negotiations, including a no deal. This should provide detail on additional staffing required, additional infrastructure, the new processes for business, and set out the costs of these plans.

Lack of coordination across government
The Committee criticises the lack of coordination across government, who were unable to specify which single Minister is responsible for border planning. The report calls on the Government to act and put in place a lead Minister to oversee this substantial body of work.

Government's border planning for Brexit unconvincing
Chair of the Committee, Yvette Cooper MP, commented:

"The Government's border planning for Brexit is extremely unconvincing.

The Government should be aiming for transition arrangements which require no change at all in customs and border requirements as everyone is running out of time to make any staffing, infrastructure or procedural changes - and they risk long delays at the border, both in the UK and abroad.

But there must also be an urgent acceleration of contingency planning in case there is no deal at all. We found the 4% increase in Border Force staff at the borders completely unconvincing. The Government must not allow bad policy decisions or poor contingency planning to mean that Border Force staff are pulled away from security, illegal goods and immigration checks to cover for customs chaos. Ministers must not allow Brexit implementation put our security at risk.

Ports, haulage and logistics companies have made very clear the problems they will face without a clear indication very soon of the contingencies which the Government is considering for post-Brexit customs arrangements in the different possible scenarios, including a transitional period or no deal at all.

It is clear from the evidence the Committee has taken that remaining in the customs union, particularly during the transition deal, is the best way of avoiding the chaos and high costs predicted by traders and trade bodies, like the CBI. However, we recognise this is not the option currently favoured by the Government.

Home Office Ministers must now demonstrate that they are aware of the risks of introducing new customs arrangements and understand the work needed to mitigate them. As a matter of urgency, it must provide details for the no deal scenario that they stress they are not afraid of, including the numbers of extra staff that will be needed to implement the new processes, and new infrastructure requirements and processes, and the associated costs. They must detail the timescales and mechanisms that will be put in place and allow businesses to plan ahead.

As things stand, the Government is running the risk of celebrating their first day of Brexit with the sight of queues of lorries stretching for miles in Kent and gridlock on the roads of Northern Ireland, which would be incredibly damaging to the UK economy and completely unacceptable to the country. Contingency planning is essential. If the Government gets this all wrong, we could be facing Operation Stack on steroids.

We expect a speedy response to this report from the Government to demonstrate that it has now taken these vital matters in hand – and we want to know which Minister is in charge. The current pace of contingency planning is insufficient and risky."

Concerns about Government’s readiness to respond to changes in customs arrangements
The Home Affairs Committee raises serious concerns about the Government’s readiness to respond to changes in customs arrangements at Britain’s borders required by a Brexit deal – or transition period – which does not see the UK maintain operational status quo and remain in the customs union.

Timetable leaves little time to implement significant change
The Secretary of State for Exiting the EU’s has set out his aim of securing a transitional arrangement in the first quarter of 2018, but the report warns that even this timetable leaves little time to implement significant change, if it is required. The practical challenge involved in changing customs and border arrangements is significant. Imports and exports are worth billions of pounds and involve a vast number of intermediaries.

HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has estimated that Brexit could lead to an increase of up to 360% in the annual number of customs declarations in the UK, from the current total of 55 million to 255 million, and estimates that the number of traders that may have to go through customs processes could double. The Institute for Government estimates that the introduction of customs declarations on EU trade could cost traders between £4 billion and £9 billion a year.

Freight and logistic companies described a “nightmare scenario” and “total chaos” if significant time is not given to traders to transition to any new customs arrangements. There are particular risks if no deal is secured in March 2019, which would require substantial changes in the volume and processes for customs checks to take place overnight.

Failure to plan sufficiently could see Border Force staff being diverted to customs checks, which raises real risks for our national security. The current 4% increase in staff is nowhere near enough.

Home Office cannot wait for agreement with EU before taking action
The Committee are clear that the Home Office cannot wait until an agreement has been reached with the EU before taking action. It will take time to hire and train additional staff, to build physical infrastructure at ports, and to develop IT systems. And any changes to customs arrangements will impact on EU ports too. If they are not prepared there will still be delays. Businesses also need to be given time to plan ahead and adapt to new arrangements.

Calls on the Government to publish a major contingency plan
The Committee calls on the Government to publish a major contingency plan setting out the potential impact on customs arrangements of the various possible outcomes of the Brexit negotiations. This includes the volume and nature of checks it would expect to operate in the event of no deal being agreed. The plan should cover costings for extra staff, additional infrastructure at ports and new processes for business.

The Government must clearly demonstrate that there will be sufficient staff in place at ports and elsewhere to maintain the UK’s security and the integrity of goods entering the UK, without resources needing to be diverted to customs operations from vital security functions carried out at the border by Home Office Border Force staff.

HM Revenue & Customs’ new IT system, the Customs Declaration Service, will play an vital role in post-Brexit customs arrangements but this project is not due to be completed until January 2019, only two months before Brexit day. The Government must set out what contingency planning is in place should the system be delayed or lack full functionality.

Border between Northern Ireland and Ireland
The border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is acknowledged to present particular difficulties for post-Brexit planning and this could have a grave impact on the day to day lives of people living and working there. Plans to expand the use of the “trusted trader” Approved Economic Operator and approved warehouse schemes could address some of the specific issues here and in the UK more widely. But the Government needs to do more to inform traders now about what this would mean in practice. It must also inform businesses about the accreditation requirements now, so that they can start this process as soon as possible, and improve the registration system.

Further information
Image: iStockphoto
 
Honest question, when you voted to leave, did you assume that Cameron had a plan in place should the leave side win?
I took for granted that even an idiot would make contingency plans for either possible outcome if they're going to call for such a vote. As the Prime Minister who called the referendum it was his responsibility to plan ahead for either outcome and lead The country through the process (or not if he'd chosen to ignore it). The fact that he didn't have any plan after calling such a monumental referendum and then just walked away after not getting the result he wanted in order to avoid cleaning up the mess he created is nothing short of a disgrace and shows just what sort of man he is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top