Brexit Benefits Log

[belton rover]

Any consequences of Brexit I accept as a result of the vote to leave, which I was a part of.

I don’t understand what that has to do with Not’s post.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Well, new Customs checks being imposed somewhere into and out of Northern Ireland were always going to be a consequence of Brexit, unless the UK stayed within the Single Market.

[belton rover]

It seems you are simply refusing to acknowledge my point, so I’ll leave it there.

[Glyn_Wigley]

I'm refusing to acknowledge that NNK said what you say he did. Because he didn't say it, you did.

[belton rover]

Okay, let me take it back and say this instead:

How dare you explicitly say that I, as a Brexiter voted for that.
Cut to his link that the Good Friday agreement has been/will be renounced.
It means EXACTLY the same.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Okay, let me take it back and say this instead:

How dare you explicitly say that I, as a Brexiter voted for that.
Cut to his link that the Good Friday agreement has been/will be renounced.
It means EXACTLY the same.

It does NOT mean exactly the same. As I've been saying, if you voted for Brexit you also voted for the consequences of it, even if they're unknown at the time of the vote. Although it WAS known that there would be consequences in Northern Ireland (or it should have been known by those voting for Brexit), no-one could have known at the time of the Referendum what they would exactly turn out to be - especially as all the Leavers were telling us all we were still going to be in the Single Market if we voted to leave!

If you're still not sure, ask yourself one very simple question - 'Would this be happening if we had voted to Remain?'. If the answer is no, then it IS something that Brexiters voted for, even if they didn't know it was going to happen as a result of voting to leave.

[belton rover]

‘This is the consequence of what you voted for’, is NOTHING like ‘this is what you voted for’.


Perhaps we should just ask ‘Not’ what he actually means by it. He’s had long enough to think about it.

[SydneyRover]

I don't know why you're getting all wound up about brexit belton didn't you tell everyone only last week you were not sure what you were voting for?

[belton rover]

I don't know why you're getting all wound up about brexit belton didn't you tell everyone only last week you were not sure what you were voting for?

But I’m not getting wound up about Brexit, Sydney. I’m getting wound up by quite a despicable accusation that you deem fit to make light of.

At least Not knows why I voted - so the troubles in Ireland could start up again.

[selby]

  Glyn, we are out now, and we should be in charge of our own destiny, and if that means telling the EU to go do one then so be it. It' s better than grey areas at least everyone should know where they stand.

[selby]

  United Seaways have announced a new roll on roll off ferry crossing from Poole to Morocco saving three days on the present journey which has to be from Britain to Spain and then from Spain to Morocco at present, and will take trade away from Spanish ports.
  It will save unnecessary paper work with trade between Britain and Morocco worth £2.5 billion in 2018 and expected to grow significantly as we source produce away from the EU and encourage other sea routes to be opened up to other destinations on the African coast.

[SydneyRover]

Just have to make up the other 2.3 trillion and we're square.

[drfchound]

  United Seaways have announced a new roll on roll off ferry crossing from Poole to Morocco saving three days on the present journey which has to be from Britain to Spain and then from Spain to Morocco at present, and will take trade away from Spanish ports.
  It will save unnecessary paper work with trade between Britain and Morocco worth £2.5 billion in 2018 and expected to grow significantly as we source produce away from the EU and encourage other sea routes to be opened up to other destinations on the African coast.

Well that must be a benefit selby.
No doubt that other savings will begin to stack up soon.

[Donnywolf]

Meanwhile Irish ferry routes going directly EU to EU

https://www.politico.eu/article/ferry-firms-avoid-britain-with-brexit-buster-services-from-ireland-to-eu/

So that cuts Irish sea crossings out losing us the UK (I would guess) much much more than we gain in going direct to Morocco

Holyhead Dover and others all bypassed by those lorries from Ireland destined for Calais Zeebrugge etc and that will be a big BIG loss I guess (again)

[Ldr]

How wolfie  (forgive if a stupid question but waiting to head down for surgery so head not in good place

[Not Now Kato]

Belton, please accept my apologies for not replying sooner to your comments, I was somewhat busy yesterday and didn't visit this thread until minutes before I went to bed last night.
 
Having said that, I believe Glyn has more than adequately summed up the situation; and for that I thank him.  In fact, if there had been an announcement that everyone in the UK was suddenly £1,000 a year better off due to Brexit then my statement would have been equally true "Just look what Brexiters voted for....", but of course, you wouldn't have dissagreed with that, would you?
 
But if you want to look into this a little deeper then when the issue was raised prior to the referendum there were only three possible options in respect of the Northern Ireland/ Republic of Ireland border question....
 
1. The UK as a whole remain in the Single Market and Customs Union
2. A Hard Border is set up between NI and the RoI
3. NI remains in the Single Market and Customs Union with a border between NI and the rest of the UK, effectively in the Irish Sea.
 
That was as true then as it is today, there are no other possible options. Yes, at the time Gove and Johnson talked about a 'technology solution', but that was just another Unicorn to fool people - such a system doesn't exist and even if it were to be developed it would have to meet EU requirements and there would have to be border checks anyway.
 
So, let's look at those options in a little detail....
 
Option 1. was the sensible option as it removed all issues surrounding the NI/RoI border.  Further, it also simplified all trade between the UK and the EU as in reality nothing would have changed.  However, it would have been hard to sell to hard line Brexiters and, especially, the Hard Right in the Tory Party who would have argued that it meant that we wouldn't have really left the EU. May tried to include a form of it in her agreement with the EU however, this was voted down by the Tory Hard Right and, sadly, Labour!
 
Option 2. was a non starter. Firstly, it would be totally against the Good Friday Agreement.  Secondly there were many physical, cost and trade implications, (not least the Americans openly stating that we could forget a trade agreement if we wrote off the GFA). There would also need to be border checks.
 
So that leaves Option 3. which is where we are today. That was never going to be acceptable to the 'loyalists' in NI but it was the only option left to the Tory Right.  Johnson openly said that there would be no border checks with this option, (another of his lies), and that if there was any additional paperwork send it to him and he'd sort it, (yet another lie). As the effects of leaving the EU in the way we chose are now having a big effect on the people of NI it was always to be expected that they'd react strongly to it.
 
And now we're seeing the effects of choosing Option 3. Something totally predictable, but either ignored by Leave Voters or they couldn't care less.  I've posted this before, but in a discussion with friends about the three options, prior to the referendum, one of them actually said "Fcuk the Irish", falling clearly into that latter category; the others felt that there'd be another solution that would solve the issues falling into the 'ignore reality' category.
 
I genuinely hope that the situation in NI doesn't escalate to the point of violence and bloodshed, but I stand fully by my statement in my earlier post.

[Glyn_Wigley]

  United Seaways have announced a new roll on roll off ferry crossing from Poole to Morocco saving three days on the present journey which has to be from Britain to Spain and then from Spain to Morocco at present, and will take trade away from Spanish ports.
  It will save unnecessary paper work with trade between Britain and Morocco worth £2.5 billion in 2018 and expected to grow significantly as we source produce away from the EU and encourage other sea routes to be opened up to other destinations on the African coast.

Despite that there was nothing stopping anybody running a direct route between the UK and Morocco before Brexit anyway, I'd love to know what the 'unnecessary' paperwork is that's being avoided. Over to you, selby.

PS It's a shame we threw away the EU Preference Agreements with all the North African countries that allowed UK businesses to import their goods free of Duty when we left the EU, isn't it? We might be aiming to import more of their goods but they'll be more expensive to import than they were before. Perhaps you see that as a benefit too.

[Not Now Kato]

How wolfie  (forgive if a stupid question but waiting to head down for surgery so head not in good place

Sorry to hear this LDR. Hope all goes well for you and that you have a speedy recovery.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hope everything is ok Ldr.

[BillyStubbsTears]

This "look what you voted for" spat has me bemused.

It takes a bit of an effort to interpret that as "I genuinely and seriously believe you voted with the express intention of restarting The Troubles."

It's a turn of phrase. It means "Look what your vote has enabled." It's a rhetorical device which emphasises the responsibility for the outcome, even if it was an unintended and unwished outcome.

Or have we changed the English language now, and every word, every phrase is only to be interpreted strictly literally.

Personally, my interest is far more in the troubling issue at the core. The Leave side told us that concerns about Brexit stoking sectarian troubles were Project Fear. Surely we all have a responsibility to reflect on the predictions and the outcomes. Rather than lose yet another discussion down a rabbit hole of subjective semantics.

[Glyn_Wigley]

What do you mean when you say 'semantics'?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Very good!

[belton rover]

This "look what you voted for" spat has me bemused.

It takes a bit of an effort to interpret that as "I genuinely and seriously believe you voted with the express intention of restarting The Troubles."

It's a turn of phrase. It means "Look what your vote has enabled." It's a rhetorical device which emphasises the responsibility for the outcome, even if it was an unintended and unwished outcome.

Or have we changed the English language now, and every word, every phrase is only to be interpreted strictly literally.

Personally, my interest is far more in the troubling issue at the core. The Leave side told us that concerns about Brexit stoking sectarian troubles were Project Fear. Surely we all have a responsibility to reflect on the predictions and the outcomes. Rather than lose yet another discussion down a rabbit hole of subjective semantics.

I wondered how long it would take you.
You are now suddenly bemused by someone (me) of taking something literally, after accusing me of all sorts of bullshit for not taking you literally on many occasions.

This makes you a complete hypocrite who will changes his own rules to suit agenda.

You have attempted to ridicule me for explaining my views on interpretation of language many times. And yet here you are.

If Not didn’t mean I voted for this, then he should at least have the courtesy to say so.

You on the other hand, are now just playing the WUM game.
A new low for you.

Edit: Not - I hadn’t seen your reply when I wrote this.

[belton rover]

Belton, please accept my apologies for not replying sooner to your comments, I was somewhat busy yesterday and didn't visit this thread until minutes before I went to bed last night.
 
Having said that, I believe Glyn has more than adequately summed up the situation; and for that I thank him.  In fact, if there had been an announcement that everyone in the UK was suddenly £1,000 a year better off due to Brexit then my statement would have been equally true "Just look what Brexiters voted for....", but of course, you wouldn't have dissagreed with that, would you?
 
But if you want to look into this a little deeper then when the issue was raised prior to the referendum there were only three possible options in respect of the Northern Ireland/ Republic of Ireland border question....
 
1. The UK as a whole remain in the Single Market and Customs Union
2. A Hard Border is set up between NI and the RoI
3. NI remains in the Single Market and Customs Union with a border between NI and the rest of the UK, effectively in the Irish Sea.
 
That was as true then as it is today, there are no other possible options. Yes, at the time Gove and Johnson talked about a 'technology solution', but that was just another Unicorn to fool people - such a system doesn't exist and even if it were to be developed it would have to meet EU requirements and there would have to be border checks anyway.
 
So, let's look at those options in a little detail....
 
Option 1. was the sensible option as it removed all issues surrounding the NI/RoI border.  Further, it also simplified all trade between the UK and the EU as in reality nothing would have changed.  However, it would have been hard to sell to hard line Brexiters and, especially, the Hard Right in the Tory Party who would have argued that it meant that we wouldn't have really left the EU. May tried to include a form of it in her agreement with the EU however, this was voted down by the Tory Hard Right and, sadly, Labour!
 
Option 2. was a non starter. Firstly, it would be totally against the Good Friday Agreement.  Secondly there were many physical, cost and trade implications, (not least the Americans openly stating that we could forget a trade agreement if we wrote off the GFA). There would also need to be border checks.
 
So that leaves Option 3. which is where we are today. That was never going to be acceptable to the 'loyalists' in NI but it was the only option left to the Tory Right.  Johnson openly said that there would be no border checks with this option, (another of his lies), and that if there was any additional paperwork send it to him and he'd sort it, (yet another lie). As the effects of leaving the EU in the way we chose are now having a big effect on the people of NI it was always to be expected that they'd react strongly to it.
 
And now we're seeing the effects of choosing Option 3. Something totally predictable, but either ignored by Leave Voters or they couldn't care less.  I've posted this before, but in a discussion with friends about the three options, prior to the referendum, one of them actually said "Fcuk the Irish", falling clearly into that latter category; the others felt that there'd be another solution that would solve the issues falling into the 'ignore reality' category.
 
I genuinely hope that the situation in NI doesn't escalate to the point of violence and bloodshed, but I stand fully by my statement in my earlier post.

Thanks for your detailed reply, Not.
As I tried to explain to Glyn, my issue wasn’t with the link or the facts regarding the Good Friday agreement. It was with your comment about ‘what Brexiters voted for’, which was, to me a blase comment written to antagonise, like you might do regarding blue passports or something equally trivial.
If you didn’t mean for it to have that effect, then fine, but if you did, then it was in very bad taste.

This is why I asked you to clarify what you meant. It’s just a shame that others thought it the right thing to do to jump on the remainers’ roadshow and answer for you.

[Ldr]

Thanks BST, NNK et al, back on ward now be home later, just an quick one today

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

My issue with your approach is simple. If there are ever subtleties and potential interpretations of meaning is someone's words, you frequently choose the interpretation which justifies you taking offence or kick off an argument which is tangential to the substantive topic.

On this theme, as I say, it does take a real effort of will to interpret NNK's original post as literally meaning that you knowingly and willingly voted for an increase in sectarian tensions, but somehow you managed to put that meaning on it.

[belton rover]

Billy. It only takes real effort for you because you don’t want to see it like that. You see things as you choose to see them, as is clearly evident here. Yet you are bewildered and flabbergasted when you think others are doing the same.

As I said - at best, you are a hypocrite. At worst, a WUM.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Belton.

So you are seriously telling me that you saw NNK's OP and thought "My God! He thinks I deliberately chose to vote for an increase in sectarian tensions!"

Really?

As regards  those insults you've thrown my way, I challenge you to substantiate those. As I say, the root cause of every argument we have had has been your insistence on putting interpretations on what people have said that justify you taking offence. If I've pointed that out regularly, I don't see how that makes me a hypocrite or WUM.

[belton rover]

No Billy
What I thought is that Not was trying to wind people up with the language he chose.
And it worked. There are many things open to banter or piss taking that are part and parcel of a forum like this (in fact there’s not enough of it on here due to how the forum has changed for the worst) in the right context and for certain subjects. I thought what Not said, considering the topic, was below the belt. Though that doesn’t make him a WUM, by the way.

I decline your challenge. The evidence is there for anyone to find who doesn’t have much of a will to live.
A starter though: look anywhere where you have accused me of misrepresentation of you and your words, or anywhere where you have used the phrase ‘bad faith’.

[Not Now Kato]

Belton, please accept my apologies for not replying sooner to your comments, I was somewhat busy yesterday and didn't visit this thread until minutes before I went to bed last night.
 
Having said that, I believe Glyn has more than adequately summed up the situation; and for that I thank him.  In fact, if there had been an announcement that everyone in the UK was suddenly £1,000 a year better off due to Brexit then my statement would have been equally true "Just look what Brexiters voted for....", but of course, you wouldn't have dissagreed with that, would you?
 
But if you want to look into this a little deeper then when the issue was raised prior to the referendum there were only three possible options in respect of the Northern Ireland/ Republic of Ireland border question....
 
1. The UK as a whole remain in the Single Market and Customs Union
2. A Hard Border is set up between NI and the RoI
3. NI remains in the Single Market and Customs Union with a border between NI and the rest of the UK, effectively in the Irish Sea.
 
That was as true then as it is today, there are no other possible options. Yes, at the time Gove and Johnson talked about a 'technology solution', but that was just another Unicorn to fool people - such a system doesn't exist and even if it were to be developed it would have to meet EU requirements and there would have to be border checks anyway.
 
So, let's look at those options in a little detail....
 
Option 1. was the sensible option as it removed all issues surrounding the NI/RoI border.  Further, it also simplified all trade between the UK and the EU as in reality nothing would have changed.  However, it would have been hard to sell to hard line Brexiters and, especially, the Hard Right in the Tory Party who would have argued that it meant that we wouldn't have really left the EU. May tried to include a form of it in her agreement with the EU however, this was voted down by the Tory Hard Right and, sadly, Labour!
 
Option 2. was a non starter. Firstly, it would be totally against the Good Friday Agreement.  Secondly there were many physical, cost and trade implications, (not least the Americans openly stating that we could forget a trade agreement if we wrote off the GFA). There would also need to be border checks.
 
So that leaves Option 3. which is where we are today. That was never going to be acceptable to the 'loyalists' in NI but it was the only option left to the Tory Right.  Johnson openly said that there would be no border checks with this option, (another of his lies), and that if there was any additional paperwork send it to him and he'd sort it, (yet another lie). As the effects of leaving the EU in the way we chose are now having a big effect on the people of NI it was always to be expected that they'd react strongly to it.
 
And now we're seeing the effects of choosing Option 3. Something totally predictable, but either ignored by Leave Voters or they couldn't care less.  I've posted this before, but in a discussion with friends about the three options, prior to the referendum, one of them actually said "Fcuk the Irish", falling clearly into that latter category; the others felt that there'd be another solution that would solve the issues falling into the 'ignore reality' category.
 
I genuinely hope that the situation in NI doesn't escalate to the point of violence and bloodshed, but I stand fully by my statement in my earlier post.

Thanks for your detailed reply, Not.
As I tried to explain to Glyn, my issue wasn’t with the link or the facts regarding the Good Friday agreement. It was with your comment about ‘what Brexiters voted for’, which was, to me a blase comment written to antagonise, like you might do regarding blue passports or something equally trivial.
If you didn’t mean for it to have that effect, then fine, but if you did, then it was in very bad taste.

This is why I asked you to clarify what you meant. It’s just a shame that others thought it the right thing to do to jump on the remainers’ roadshow and answer for you.

It most certainly was not written to antagonise, Belton; it was simply a question of fact to point out a failure of Brexit, and I hope my further detailed explanation was further clarification of what I meant. The issue was certainly well known before the vote.
 
I started this thread with a view to people posting real benefits of Brexit if/as they arose. To date I seem to be the only one who has posted a 'tangible benefit' - EU companies applying for a licence to practice in the finance area of the UK, (much earlier in the thread now), yet no one has commented on that or explored it further.
 
Perhaps my mistake was in posting the link to what is happening in NI in the Brexit Benefits Log thread rather than what I posted itself; and that in hindsight I should have created a separate thread.