No Brexit Extension

[Campsall rover]

Political bluster. I'd be stunned if no compromise appears.

However I do actually see the point campsall makes. The point of brexit was to move independently of the EU whether you like it or not. That is something the government is clearly sticking to.  What BOTH parties should realise is that it doesn't have to be the extreme ends of the spectrum.

bfyp you mentioned me in your post as saying i was making sense. While I know I always make sense ( well maybe not )
I have not actually posted on this thread once to my knowledge. 
If I did it must have been a very long time ago.

Thanks anyway. 

[Glyn_Wigley]

And what at the end of 2021? Still no agreement. 4.5 yrs and nothing. What’s difference will another year make?

So you do want us to crash out?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Our friends in the EU are currently insisting that if they pass a new law in the future with which we in this country do not comply or don't follow suit, then they want the automatic right to punish us and to retaliate.

they are saying that the UK should be the only country in the world not to have sovereign control over its fishing waters.

Who in their right mind would accept the above? And whilst we do not make the most of our own quota currently, it’s the principle that is key, not the waters or fish.

We’ve got some short term pain coming. I think that was always the case. Deal or no deal.
Regarding food supplies, I won’t be paying through the nose for overinflated french foie gras from Waitrose next year. I’ll settle for some British bred chicken livers instead.
And I’ll be taking Camembert and Gouda of my cheese board and sticking to cheddar.

NR.

I'm sorry but that post is just ridiculous, and goes to the heart of how bad the arguments are on the Leave side.

The EU is insisting that IF WE WANT TARIFF-FREE ACCESS TO THE SINGLE MARKET, then we will have to abide by the rules of the Single Market. What on earth  is unfair about that?

or, look at it the other way. The UK is saying that we want tariff-free access to the Single Market, but we want the right not to have to implement the rules that the rest of the EU countries will have to work to. It is an absolute nonsense. It's like the French diplomat said a few years ago, the UK's attitude to the EU is like that of a man who goes to a wife-swapping party but doesn't take his wife.. We want all the benefits and none of the costs.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Our friends in the EU are currently insisting that if they pass a new law in the future with which we in this country do not comply or don't follow suit, then they want the automatic right to punish us and to retaliate.

they are saying that the UK should be the only country in the world not to have sovereign control over its fishing waters.

Who in their right mind would accept the above? And whilst we do not make the most of our own quota currently, it’s the principle that is key, not the waters or fish.

We’ve got some short term pain coming. I think that was always the case. Deal or no deal.
Regarding food supplies, I won’t be paying through the nose for overinflated french foie gras from Waitrose next year. I’ll settle for some British bred chicken livers instead.
And I’ll be taking Camembert and Gouda of my cheese board and sticking to cheddar.

You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you.
The EU was never going to make our leaving easy but the real blame is with the leave voters.

You just don't get how negotiations work do you?

It's not this romanticised Hollywood idea of two adversaries playing chicken. It is about know what the other side's red lines are and knowing what they are prepared to compromise on.

The EU has been categorical right from the get go that a key red line is the Single Market. If we want preferential access to trading with the Single Market, we only get that if we agree to abide by the rules of the Single Market. The integrity of the Single Market is FAR more important to the EU than the amount of trade that they do with us and they will not budge on that issue.

Stating that openly is not rolling over and showing them your belly. It is being grown up enough to know what the terms of the discussion are.

The question for us is, is our economic strength more important to us than our ability to run our economy as we want? There is no expert anywhere in the world who things we can possibly end up richer by crashing out of the SM, but being able to make our own deals with America or Uruguay or whoever. So we have to decide - is this about standing up for principle that, in reality, is pointless or about liming the economic mess that Brexit will be?

[idler]

I have to admit to not knowing all about the politics of it, but as a business owner who sends products to NI, ROI and Europe on a daily basis, this Brexit malarkey is proving to be a massive pain in the arse, to put it politely.

If taking back control means added costs, long delays, a truckload more complicated admin and faffing around and a big dose of uncertainty then it looks as if we're getting all the control we wanted.

My eldest step-daughter works for a freight company and most of their clients didn't understand just what Brexit entails. She said that say you were importing glass jars you would pay tax. If you filled the jars with wax and exported them to Europe there would then be a further tax, making then more expensive and possibly uneconomic. Some of their biggest customers are already saying that they can't see themselves surviving. The extra paperwork costs and tax is a killer.

[drfchound]

Our friends in the EU are currently insisting that if they pass a new law in the future with which we in this country do not comply or don't follow suit, then they want the automatic right to punish us and to retaliate.

they are saying that the UK should be the only country in the world not to have sovereign control over its fishing waters.

Who in their right mind would accept the above? And whilst we do not make the most of our own quota currently, it’s the principle that is key, not the waters or fish.

We’ve got some short term pain coming. I think that was always the case. Deal or no deal.
Regarding food supplies, I won’t be paying through the nose for overinflated french foie gras from Waitrose next year. I’ll settle for some British bred chicken livers instead.
And I’ll be taking Camembert and Gouda of my cheese board and sticking to cheddar.

You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you.
The EU was never going to make our leaving easy but the real blame is with the leave voters.

You just don't get how negotiations work do you?

It's not this romanticised Hollywood idea of two adversaries playing chicken. It is about know what the other side's red lines are and knowing what they are prepared to compromise on.

The EU has been categorical right from the get go that a key red line is the Single Market. If we want preferential access to trading with the Single Market, we only get that if we agree to abide by the rules of the Single Market. The integrity of the Single Market is FAR more important to the EU than the amount of trade that they do with us and they will not budge on that issue.

Stating that openly is not rolling over and showing them your belly. It is being grown up enough to know what the terms of the discussion are.

The question for us is, is our economic strength more important to us than our ability to run our economy as we want? There is no expert anywhere in the world who things we can possibly end up richer by crashing out of the SM, but being able to make our own deals with America or Uruguay or whoever. So we have to decide - is this about standing up for principle that, in reality, is pointless or about liming the economic mess that Brexit will be?

BST. how on earth is my comment indicative of not being able to understand how negotiations work?

As for the rest of your post, I did say that the EU were never going to be easy didn’t I.
Why should they make it so.
The bit about “being grown up enough to understand” is typical of one of your posts.
As condescending as ever sadly.
It appears that you think I am suggesting we should roll over when clearly I am not.
Some of the anti Tory group though do seem to be putting all the blame for the current stalemate at the door of Number Ten.
As a remainer, don’t you think that the Leave voters have brought this mess upon us.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound.

I'm not sure how else your comment "You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you" is supposed to be interpreted. Negotiations only work when both sides properly understand what are the points the other one will move on. Establishing those is not "rolling over". It is key to facilitating the process.

We are a few hours away from the deadline now, and still we have never established whether the principle of being able to trade in an unfettered way is worth the £100-200bn per year hit to our economy that pretty much every economic analysis predicts it would result in. We still seem to be assuming that the EU is bluffing when it says that we cannot have tariff-free access to the SM without playing by the SM rules. So we are sticking to the Bad Deal Worse Than No Deal line, which no one has ever believed, because it isn't true.

One of three things is now about to happen.

1) Maybe the EU will capitulate and let us have the deal we want. I'd say the chances of that happening are vanishingly small, because as I've said before, it means the unravelling of the EU.

2) Maybe Johnson will finally realise it's decision time and he has to throw his hand, with a couple of meaningless sweeteners chucked in by the EU for him to parade as a success. Which then raises the question: What exactly has been the point of Brexit?

3) Both sides stick to their guns and we crash out with the No Deal that was never discussed in 2016, and which has never, ever been supported by a majority of the population. And we will commit ourselves to a significantly poorer future. But we WILL get blue passports. Even though they are made in France.

[BillyStubbsTears]

As for where the blame lies for this situation, it's pretty simple to me.

It lies with the people who have never realised what the EU's approach to dealing with Brexit is. The people who never accepted that the EU would always prioritise the stability of the SM over a deal with us. And it lies with the amoral politicians who conned people into those thoughts in 2016, when they said we held all the cards and the EU would come crawling to us for a deal. Line them up, the ones who said that. They knew they were lying at the time. We'll have proof by the weekend that they were lying. And they have never once apologised for it. In fact they now run the country, after pulling off the biggest political con trick in our lifetimes.

[drfchound]

Hound.

I'm not sure how else your comment "You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you" is supposed to be interpreted. Negotiations only work when both sides properly understand what are the points the other one will move on. Establishing those is not "rolling over". It is key to facilitating the process.

We are a few hours away from the deadline now, and still we have never established whether the principle of being able to trade in an unfettered way is worth the £100-200bn per year hit to our economy that pretty much every economic analysis predicts it would result in. We still seem to be assuming that the EU is bluffing when it says that we cannot have tariff-free access to the SM without playing by the SM rules. So we are sticking to the Bad Deal Worse Than No Deal line, which no one has ever believed, because it isn't true.

One of three things is now about to happen.

1) Maybe the EU will capitulate and let us have the deal we want. I'd say the chances of that happening are vanishingly small, because as I've said before, it means the unravelling of the EU.

2) Maybe Johnson will finally realise it's decision time and he has to throw his hand, with a couple of meaningless sweeteners chucked in by the EU for him to parade as a success. Which then raises the question: What exactly has been the point of Brexit?

3) Both sides stick to their guns and we crash out with the No Deal that was never discussed in 2016, and which has never, ever been supported by a majority of the population. And we will commit ourselves to a significantly poorer future. But we WILL get blue passports. Even though they are made in France.

BST, you are clearly not understanding what I am saying then.
There are lots of people laying the blame for the inability of the two sides to agree  but to read posts on here and elsewhere people are slagging off the government for not getting it done and dusted.
If that is all that matters to them then I suggested that they simply want the government to roll over and show their belly to the EU, like a submissive dog, which will get the deal done.
Does that help you to understand the meaning of my original post now.

As for what is the point of Brexit..... going back to pre the referendum vote the majority of the people I discussed it with who were going to vote to leave based their opinion on being able to be in control of our borders and restrict immigration.
I don’t recall anyone talking about the financial impact on the UK post Brexit or the difficulty we might face with tariffs etc.
They did though mention the famous £250m per week that Johnson and Farage told us about.
The average bloke back then had no idea of how complicated this was going to be.

[drfchound]

As for where the blame lies for this situation, it's pretty simple to me.

It lies with the people who have never realised what the EU's approach to dealing with Brexit is. The people who never accepted that the EU would always prioritise the stability of the SM over a deal with us. And it lies with the amoral politicians who conned people into those thoughts in 2016, when they said we held all the cards and the EU would come crawling to us for a deal. Line them up, the ones who said that. They knew they were lying at the time. We'll have proof by the weekend that they were lying. And they have never once apologised for it. In fact they now run the country, after pulling off the biggest political con trick in our lifetimes.

Does that post indirectly say that the blame lies with the leave voters then.

[IDM]

Hound.

I'm not sure how else your comment "You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you" is supposed to be interpreted. Negotiations only work when both sides properly understand what are the points the other one will move on. Establishing those is not "rolling over". It is key to facilitating the process.

We are a few hours away from the deadline now, and still we have never established whether the principle of being able to trade in an unfettered way is worth the £100-200bn per year hit to our economy that pretty much every economic analysis predicts it would result in. We still seem to be assuming that the EU is bluffing when it says that we cannot have tariff-free access to the SM without playing by the SM rules. So we are sticking to the Bad Deal Worse Than No Deal line, which no one has ever believed, because it isn't true.

One of three things is now about to happen.

1) Maybe the EU will capitulate and let us have the deal we want. I'd say the chances of that happening are vanishingly small, because as I've said before, it means the unravelling of the EU.

2) Maybe Johnson will finally realise it's decision time and he has to throw his hand, with a couple of meaningless sweeteners chucked in by the EU for him to parade as a success. Which then raises the question: What exactly has been the point of Brexit?

3) Both sides stick to their guns and we crash out with the No Deal that was never discussed in 2016, and which has never, ever been supported by a majority of the population. And we will commit ourselves to a significantly poorer future. But we WILL get blue passports. Even though they are made in France.

BST, you are clearly not understanding what I am saying then.
There are lots of people laying the blame for the inability of the two sides to agree  but to read posts on here and elsewhere people are slagging off the government for not getting it done and dusted.
If that is all that matters to them then I suggested that they simply want the government to roll over and show their belly to the EU, like a submissive dog, which will get the deal done.
Does that help you to understand the meaning of my original post now.

As for what is the point of Brexit..... going back to pre the referendum vote the majority of the people I discussed it with who were going to vote to leave based their opinion on being able to be in control of our borders and restrict immigration.
I don’t recall anyone talking about the financial impact on the UK post Brexit or the difficulty we might face with tariffs etc.
They did though mention the famous £250m per week that Johnson and Farage told us about.
The average bloke back then had no idea of how complicated this was going to be.

And that, highlighted, had been the problem with the referendum.   People had no idea what they would be voting for with Brexit, but voted for it anyway.

I agree it would have been impossible to define in great detail what brexit would have meant, but it was surely clear that there would be much more than taking back border control to limit immigration.?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound.

I apologise if I've misunderstood you but I'm not sure I have. You are equating getting the negotiations done with rolling over and showing your belly. That was what spurred my first post.

Regarding people not being aware of the complexity of the economic issues in 2016, that's hardly surprising. The Leave side refused to engage in that topic. The laughed off "Project Fear" and played the nationalism card, insisting that we'd get a great deal from a cringing EU.

In 2014, a poll in Scotland had a 5% majority for Independence. They then asked "How would you vote if you knew for certain that Independence would leave you, personally, £500 worse off?" The result was 10% majority AGAINST independence.

I put it to you that if, in 2016, voters had been told by the Leave side, you can take back control of our borders (sic: we always could control our borders but chose not to...) but it will mean that we lose something north of £1500 per year for every man, woman and child in the country, we'd have seen a different result.

So no, I don't blame Leave voters for not taking that into account then. They were conned by a bunch of spivs. I do wonder why they refuse to accept they were conned now, though.

[BillyStubbsTears]

On the subject of the economic cost of leaving, in a poll last week, a scarcely credible 22% of people said they thought the UK economy would be STRONGER in the event of a No Deal outcome. Enough to truly make you weep.

[phil o sophical]

No wonder Nigel Farage called it a day after he'd achieved his political ambitions of getting us out of the EU Talk about leaving someone to clear the mess up after the empty promises that he never quite managed to substantiate

[Glyn_Wigley]

I have to admit to not knowing all about the politics of it, but as a business owner who sends products to NI, ROI and Europe on a daily basis, this Brexit malarkey is proving to be a massive pain in the arse, to put it politely.

If taking back control means added costs, long delays, a truckload more complicated admin and faffing around and a big dose of uncertainty then it looks as if we're getting all the control we wanted.

My eldest step-daughter works for a freight company and most of their clients didn't understand just what Brexit entails. She said that say you were importing glass jars you would pay tax. If you filled the jars with wax and exported them to Europe there would then be a further tax, making then more expensive and possibly uneconomic. Some of their biggest customers are already saying that they can't see themselves surviving. The extra paperwork costs and tax is a killer.

But did she tell them about how IPR helps with the re-exporting on that case?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Hound.

I'm not sure how else your comment "You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you" is supposed to be interpreted. Negotiations only work when both sides properly understand what are the points the other one will move on. Establishing those is not "rolling over". It is key to facilitating the process.

We are a few hours away from the deadline now, and still we have never established whether the principle of being able to trade in an unfettered way is worth the £100-200bn per year hit to our economy that pretty much every economic analysis predicts it would result in. We still seem to be assuming that the EU is bluffing when it says that we cannot have tariff-free access to the SM without playing by the SM rules. So we are sticking to the Bad Deal Worse Than No Deal line, which no one has ever believed, because it isn't true.

One of three things is now about to happen.

1) Maybe the EU will capitulate and let us have the deal we want. I'd say the chances of that happening are vanishingly small, because as I've said before, it means the unravelling of the EU.

2) Maybe Johnson will finally realise it's decision time and he has to throw his hand, with a couple of meaningless sweeteners chucked in by the EU for him to parade as a success. Which then raises the question: What exactly has been the point of Brexit?

3) Both sides stick to their guns and we crash out with the No Deal that was never discussed in 2016, and which has never, ever been supported by a majority of the population. And we will commit ourselves to a significantly poorer future. But we WILL get blue passports. Even though they are made in France.

BST, you are clearly not understanding what I am saying then.
There are lots of people laying the blame for the inability of the two sides to agree  but to read posts on here and elsewhere people are slagging off the government for not getting it done and dusted.
If that is all that matters to them then I suggested that they simply want the government to roll over and show their belly to the EU, like a submissive dog, which will get the deal done.
Does that help you to understand the meaning of my original post now.

As for what is the point of Brexit..... going back to pre the referendum vote the majority of the people I discussed it with who were going to vote to leave based their opinion on being able to be in control of our borders and restrict immigration.
I don’t recall anyone talking about the financial impact on the UK post Brexit or the difficulty we might face with tariffs etc.
They did though mention the famous £250m per week that Johnson and Farage told us about.
The average bloke back then had no idea of how complicated this was going to be.

And that, highlighted, had been the problem with the referendum.   People had no idea what they would be voting for with Brexit, but voted for it anyway.

I agree it would have been impossible to define in great detail what brexit would have meant, but it was surely clear that there would be much more than taking back border control to limit immigration.?

But dare to question the reasons people voted the way they did and all you get back is 'people knew what they were voting for'.

[Glyn_Wigley]

As for where the blame lies for this situation, it's pretty simple to me.

It lies with the people who have never realised what the EU's approach to dealing with Brexit is. The people who never accepted that the EU would always prioritise the stability of the SM over a deal with us. And it lies with the amoral politicians who conned people into those thoughts in 2016, when they said we held all the cards and the EU would come crawling to us for a deal. Line them up, the ones who said that. They knew they were lying at the time. We'll have proof by the weekend that they were lying. And they have never once apologised for it. In fact they now run the country, after pulling off the biggest political con trick in our lifetimes.

Does that post indirectly say that the blame lies with the leave voters then.

If they voted based on the lies they were told, does that make them gullible or culpable..?

[Dutch Uncle]

Hound.

I apologise if I've misunderstood you but I'm not sure I have. You are equating getting the negotiations done with rolling over and showing your belly. That was what spurred my first post.

Regarding people not being aware of the complexity of the economic issues in 2016, that's hardly surprising. The Leave side refused to engage in that topic. The laughed off "Project Fear" and played the nationalism card, insisting that we'd get a great deal from a cringing EU.

In 2014, a poll in Scotland had a 5% majority for Independence. They then asked "How would you vote if you knew for certain that Independence would leave you, personally, £500 worse off?" The result was 10% majority AGAINST independence.

I put it to you that if, in 2016, voters had been told by the Leave side, you can take back control of our borders (sic: we always could control our borders but chose not to...) but it will mean that we lose something north of £1500 per year for every man, woman and child in the country, we'd have seen a different result.

So no, I don't blame Leave voters for not taking that into account then. They were conned by a bunch of spivs. I do wonder why they refuse to accept they were conned now, though.

Completely agree about where the blame is, but for me Cameron does not escape all blame. As I was screaming at the time (not on here) if he had run a Remain campaign based on 'here is what the EU does for us' campaign, all the benefits of cost sharing of many agencies (Think things like Europol, European Space Agency, European Patent Office, Eurocontrol, Border Control and many many more) that we will now have to pay to set up our own versions if we want to carry on in these areas; the Educational Research benefits, EU grants to poorer regions of Europe........ 

All this before the basic trading benefits.   

Not the Project fear based attitude which turned everyone off. Just say what the EU actually does did for us.

[wilts rover]

On the subject of 'taking back control' there was a haulier on Radio 5 this morning. He and some of the other hauliers he knows had applied for a permit to work in the EU that will be required on 1st January (unless there is agreement to allow UK haulies free access in the deal).

The EU were giving out 2000 permits. 10000 hauliers applied. Neither this guy or any of his mates were among the lucky ones. They asked him what he would do. Close the company and sell the lorry - all my business is gone.

We of course are not putting any limit or quota on EU or other foreign drivers entering the UK (because of course we need the goods). So the likelihood now is that we shall see more EU/foreign trucks on the road to make up for the reduction in British ones.

That is what 'taking back control' actually means in practice. And they need us more than we need them...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Dutch.

The problem is, as Hound says and as Tyke's posts suggest, in a large proportion of the electorate, it was simply impossible to move the discussion past "EU=Immigration". And it was Cameron's monumental mistake in thinking that there was any chance of a balanced debate on the pros and cons of the EU.

He called the referendum in order to address the civil war on the Right of British politics. And he lost it. there was a kind of karma in that, in as much as the whole reason that the EU immigration issue had become so toxic is because of the air of frustration in the country at the perma-slump caused by Cameron's Austerity. For a first class graduate from Oxford, he displayed remarkable ignorance about history. Every time the general population has a valid grievance about the way the system is treating them, a rabble rouser will emerge telling them it is the fault of those bas**rd foreigners. Farage was irrelevant in 2010. By 2013, after 3 years of grinding Austerity, he was an existential threat to the Tories, and the one and only reason Cameron called the Referendum was to try to neutralise that threat. It all blew up in his face, and we are now left dealing with the debris.

You'd think with a record like that, Cameron would be the worst PM for half a century. As it is, he's only the third worst we've had in 5 years!

[Glyn_Wigley]

On the subject of 'taking back control' there was a haulier on Radio 5 this morning. He and some of the other hauliers he knows had applied for a permit to work in the EU that will be required on 1st January (unless there is agreement to allow UK haulies free access in the deal).

The EU were giving out 2000 permits. 10000 hauliers applied. Neither this guy or any of his mates were among the lucky ones. They asked him what he would do. Close the company and sell the lorry - all my business is gone.

We of course are not putting any limit or quota on EU or other foreign drivers entering the UK (because of course we need the goods). So the likelihood now is that we shall see more EU/foreign trucks on the road to make up for the reduction in British ones.

That is what 'taking back control' actually means in practice. And they need us more than we need them...

I heard that too. What I remember hearing was that it wasn't the EU limiting the number of permits, but that it was all the UK government had bothered to apply for.

It'll be on here if anyone wants to listen

https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl7g#on-now

It was either on Nicky Campbell or Emma Barnett, I don't remember what time I heard it.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound.

I apologise if I've misunderstood you but I'm not sure I have. You are equating getting the negotiations done with rolling over and showing your belly. That was what spurred my first post.

Regarding people not being aware of the complexity of the economic issues in 2016, that's hardly surprising. The Leave side refused to engage in that topic. The laughed off "Project Fear" and played the nationalism card, insisting that we'd get a great deal from a cringing EU.

In 2014, a poll in Scotland had a 5% majority for Independence. They then asked "How would you vote if you knew for certain that Independence would leave you, personally, £500 worse off?" The result was 10% majority AGAINST independence.

I put it to you that if, in 2016, voters had been told by the Leave side, you can take back control of our borders (sic: we always could control our borders but chose not to...) but it will mean that we lose something north of £1500 per year for every man, woman and child in the country, we'd have seen a different result.

So no, I don't blame Leave voters for not taking that into account then. They were conned by a bunch of spivs. I do wonder why they refuse to accept they were conned now, though.

For the record, I remembered the idea of that Scottish survey, but I didn't get the numbers right. Here's the actual figures - WAY starker than I remembered.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25846914

It's hard to look at those numbers and not conclude that there would have been a different outcome in 2016 if the Leave side had been honest about the economic hit that inevitably was going to go hand in hand with Taking Back Control.

[Glyn_Wigley]

But..but..but..if they'd told the truth they'd have lost..!!

[wilts rover]

On the subject of 'taking back control' there was a haulier on Radio 5 this morning. He and some of the other hauliers he knows had applied for a permit to work in the EU that will be required on 1st January (unless there is agreement to allow UK haulies free access in the deal).

The EU were giving out 2000 permits. 10000 hauliers applied. Neither this guy or any of his mates were among the lucky ones. They asked him what he would do. Close the company and sell the lorry - all my business is gone.

We of course are not putting any limit or quota on EU or other foreign drivers entering the UK (because of course we need the goods). So the likelihood now is that we shall see more EU/foreign trucks on the road to make up for the reduction in British ones.

That is what 'taking back control' actually means in practice. And they need us more than we need them...

I heard that too. What I remember hearing was that it wasn't the EU limiting the number of permits, but that it was all the UK government had bothered to apply for.

It'll be on here if anyone wants to listen

https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl7g#on-now

It was either on Nicky Campbell or Emma Barnett, I don't remember what time I heard it.

Nicky Campbell towards the end - maybe 9.45ish

[drfchound]

Hound.

I'm not sure how else your comment "You would think that some people want us to roll over and show our underbelly wouldn’t you" is supposed to be interpreted. Negotiations only work when both sides properly understand what are the points the other one will move on. Establishing those is not "rolling over". It is key to facilitating the process.

We are a few hours away from the deadline now, and still we have never established whether the principle of being able to trade in an unfettered way is worth the £100-200bn per year hit to our economy that pretty much every economic analysis predicts it would result in. We still seem to be assuming that the EU is bluffing when it says that we cannot have tariff-free access to the SM without playing by the SM rules. So we are sticking to the Bad Deal Worse Than No Deal line, which no one has ever believed, because it isn't true.

One of three things is now about to happen.

1) Maybe the EU will capitulate and let us have the deal we want. I'd say the chances of that happening are vanishingly small, because as I've said before, it means the unravelling of the EU.

2) Maybe Johnson will finally realise it's decision time and he has to throw his hand, with a couple of meaningless sweeteners chucked in by the EU for him to parade as a success. Which then raises the question: What exactly has been the point of Brexit?

3) Both sides stick to their guns and we crash out with the No Deal that was never discussed in 2016, and which has never, ever been supported by a majority of the population. And we will commit ourselves to a significantly poorer future. But we WILL get blue passports. Even though they are made in France.

BST, you are clearly not understanding what I am saying then.
There are lots of people laying the blame for the inability of the two sides to agree  but to read posts on here and elsewhere people are slagging off the government for not getting it done and dusted.
If that is all that matters to them then I suggested that they simply want the government to roll over and show their belly to the EU, like a submissive dog, which will get the deal done.
Does that help you to understand the meaning of my original post now.

As for what is the point of Brexit..... going back to pre the referendum vote the majority of the people I discussed it with who were going to vote to leave based their opinion on being able to be in control of our borders and restrict immigration.
I don’t recall anyone talking about the financial impact on the UK post Brexit or the difficulty we might face with tariffs etc.
They did though mention the famous £250m per week that Johnson and Farage told us about.
The average bloke back then had no idea of how complicated this was going to be.

And that, highlighted, had been the problem with the referendum.   People had no idea what they would be voting for with Brexit, but voted for it anyway.

I agree it would have been impossible to define in great detail what brexit would have meant, but it was surely clear that there would be much more than taking back border control to limit immigration.?

It might have been clear to me and you IDM but as I said, most people I spoke to back then had immigration as the main reason that they voted for Brexit.

[IDM]

It beggars belief that the government didn’t extend the transition period by a year, simply to counter the pandemic as a priority..

[drfchound]

Hound.

I apologise if I've misunderstood you but I'm not sure I have. You are equating getting the negotiations done with rolling over and showing your belly. That was what spurred my first post.

Regarding people not being aware of the complexity of the economic issues in 2016, that's hardly surprising. The Leave side refused to engage in that topic. The laughed off "Project Fear" and played the nationalism card, insisting that we'd get a great deal from a cringing EU.

In 2014, a poll in Scotland had a 5% majority for Independence. They then asked "How would you vote if you knew for certain that Independence would leave you, personally, £500 worse off?" The result was 10% majority AGAINST independence.

I put it to you that if, in 2016, voters had been told by the Leave side, you can take back control of our borders (sic: we always could control our borders but chose not to...) but it will mean that we lose something north of £1500 per year for every man, woman and child in the country, we'd have seen a different result.

So no, I don't blame Leave voters for not taking that into account then. They were conned by a bunch of spivs. I do wonder why they refuse to accept they were conned now, though.

BST, your point about every person being worse off backs up my point in a way.
I have said that the average bloke didn’t know enough about what was to come so to vote leave without knowing what was to come was not a good thing to do.
They weren’t conned into voting leave by someone giving information to the contrary were they, they just weren’t told anything about what to expect personally, financially.
The big issue that was continually spouted was the £250m per week story plus control of immigration.

Finally, I wasn’t equating getting Brexit done to rolling over.
I clearly said that those people whining on about getting a deal done must be expecting our government to roll over because the EU are unlikely to back down from what they want.

[danumdon]

Hound.

I apologise if I've misunderstood you but I'm not sure I have. You are equating getting the negotiations done with rolling over and showing your belly. That was what spurred my first post.

Regarding people not being aware of the complexity of the economic issues in 2016, that's hardly surprising. The Leave side refused to engage in that topic. The laughed off "Project Fear" and played the nationalism card, insisting that we'd get a great deal from a cringing EU.

In 2014, a poll in Scotland had a 5% majority for Independence. They then asked "How would you vote if you knew for certain that Independence would leave you, personally, £500 worse off?" The result was 10% majority AGAINST independence.

I put it to you that if, in 2016, voters had been told by the Leave side, you can take back control of our borders (sic: we always could control our borders but chose not to...) but it will mean that we lose something north of £1500 per year for every man, woman and child in the country, we'd have seen a different result.

So no, I don't blame Leave voters for not taking that into account then. They were conned by a bunch of spivs. I do wonder why they refuse to accept they were conned now, though.

BST, your point about every person being worse off backs up my point in a way.
I have said that the average bloke didn’t know enough about what was to come so to vote leave without knowing what was to come was not a good thing to do.
They weren’t conned into voting leave by someone giving information to the contrary were they, they just weren’t told anything about what to expect personally, financially.
The big issue that was continually spouted was the £250m per week story plus control of immigration.

Finally, I wasn’t equating getting Brexit done to rolling over.
I clearly said that those people whining on about getting a deal done must be expecting our government to roll over because the EU are unlikely to back done from what they want.

i think you can label people into certain camps both for and against,

When it comes to accepting that most people will be worse off i think a large part of the leave vote was from a large demographic who feel they had not a great deal to lose from changing the status quo. These will be people who  could be on benefits or minimum wage, don't travel extensively bar a week in Spain and don't frequent cultural recreation, so basically your just about getting by group.

This group which were once and should still be the lifeblood of the Labour movement have slipped through the net, felt they had been neglected and left behind thought they would get their own back on the world and went full  leaver mode turning into the so called Red Wall block.

There's been much discussion everywhere about how these people,supposedly  mostly low status not collage educated voted the wrong way.

I think it was their cry for help to see something change and to sock it to the man.

Political parties of all nominations have a lot of soul searching and questions to answer because they constantly and continue to fail them.

[wilts rover]

British things for British people - Brexit's gonna be brilliant:

https://twitter.com/JaneyGodley/status/1337025469745606658

[selby]

  Well Billy, if we are sending less to the EU and they will be sending more to us but paying tariffs they have not been paying before,  for the first time they will be subsidising us, paying to do business with us for a change.
  Add that to our contributions we will not have to pay and the government will be on a nice little earner without having to do much. Plus we can charge them for access in a limited way to our fishing grounds.