Brexit Negotiations

[Herbert Anchovy]

Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

Unfortunately, it seems that what could have been a fantastic opportunity for UK organisations such as this one, we’re making such a hash of it that nobody is going to benefit! Consequently, if this is the best that our government can do then we’re better off in.

Instead, all we’re getting are two groups of people shouting “I’m right” at each other.

''Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near''

Surely by now HA you understand that any successes gained in leaving (your only one example other this this anecdotal one is about re-nationalising rail, of which most could be achieved now without leaving) would be dwarfed by the benefits of staying.

''Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left''

Why if this SME is being undercut by a company within the EU wouldn't it be undercut outside the EU also, is the EU the only place to make theses ''widgets''?

Sydney,

The point around EU restrictions around rail renationalisation is fact. The rules imposed by the EU are clear. They don’t allow wholesale nationalisation!! I really don’t know how to put this any other way for you! The examples you have are NOT examples of full nationalisation!

I offered a tangible example of how a business feels that they would benefit by trading outside the EU. I’m sure that there is a possibility that they may be undercut outside the EU too, however, with all due respect to you, I put more credence on their opinion than yours in this matter.

[SydneyRover]

So would 90% be ok?

[SydneyRover]

Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

Unfortunately, it seems that what could have been a fantastic opportunity for UK organisations such as this one, we’re making such a hash of it that nobody is going to benefit! Consequently, if this is the best that our government can do then we’re better off in.

Instead, all we’re getting are two groups of people shouting “I’m right” at each other.

''Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near''

Surely by now HA you understand that any successes gained in leaving (your only one example other this this anecdotal one is about re-nationalising rail, of which most could be achieved now without leaving) would be dwarfed by the benefits of staying.

''Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left''

Why if this SME is being undercut by a company within the EU wouldn't it be undercut outside the EU also, is the EU the only place to make theses ''widgets''?

Sydney,

The point around EU restrictions around rail renationalisation is fact. The rules imposed by the EU are clear. They don’t allow wholesale nationalisation!! I really don’t know how to put this any other way for you! The examples you have are NOT examples of full nationalisation!

I offered a tangible example of how a business feels that they would benefit by trading outside the EU. I’m sure that there is a possibility that they may be undercut outside the EU too, however, with all due respect to you, I put more credence on their opinion than yours in this matter.

With all due respect you or anyone else having a chat with a moaning business owner wishing things were better or that business would be better ''if only'' is nothing new and does not prove anything.

[wilts rover]

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

That's a really interesting example HA, I don't suppose you happen to know which EU competition & trade rules that MD is referring to that is stopping him from expanding outside the EU?

I know next to nothing about the rail industry (although that generally doesn't stop me) but I do know people who work at Westinghouse and they are forever off on a new contract somewhere, Holland, Nigeria, Hong Kong, Argentina. Clearly there is something different between selling and installing brakes and signals and whatever your guys does, I just wondered what it was?

[Herbert Anchovy]

Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

Unfortunately, it seems that what could have been a fantastic opportunity for UK organisations such as this one, we’re making such a hash of it that nobody is going to benefit! Consequently, if this is the best that our government can do then we’re better off in.

Instead, all we’re getting are two groups of people shouting “I’m right” at each other.

''Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near''

Surely by now HA you understand that any successes gained in leaving (your only one example other this this anecdotal one is about re-nationalising rail, of which most could be achieved now without leaving) would be dwarfed by the benefits of staying.

''Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left''

Why if this SME is being undercut by a company within the EU wouldn't it be undercut outside the EU also, is the EU the only place to make theses ''widgets''?

Sydney,

The point around EU restrictions around rail renationalisation is fact. The rules imposed by the EU are clear. They don’t allow wholesale nationalisation!! I really don’t know how to put this any other way for you! The examples you have are NOT examples of full nationalisation!

I offered a tangible example of how a business feels that they would benefit by trading outside the EU. I’m sure that there is a possibility that they may be undercut outside the EU too, however, with all due respect to you, I put more credence on their opinion than yours in this matter.

With all due respect you or anyone else having a chat with a moaning business owner wishing things were better or that business would be better ''if only'' is nothing new and does not prove anything.

So I have a chat (admittedly nothing formal, just a quick chat over a coffee) with a business owner who expressed genuine concerns and you simply dismiss this as moaning?

You’ve been keen to mention a few times that nobody has yet given one good reason for leaving the EU...maybe it’s because you’re not listening?

[Herbert Anchovy]

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

That's a really interesting example HA, I don't suppose you happen to know which EU competition & trade rules that MD is referring to that is stopping him from expanding outside the EU?

I know next to nothing about the rail industry (although that generally doesn't stop me) but I do know people who work at Westinghouse and they are forever off on a new contract somewhere, Holland, Nigeria, Hong Kong, Argentina. Clearly there is something different between selling and installing brakes and signals and whatever your guys does, I just wondered what it was?

Wilts,

Sorry, I probably didn’t make it clear, but the company that I was speaking with aren’t in the rail industry.

Equally, I can’t shed any light on the specific regulations I’m afraid.

[SydneyRover]

Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

Unfortunately, it seems that what could have been a fantastic opportunity for UK organisations such as this one, we’re making such a hash of it that nobody is going to benefit! Consequently, if this is the best that our government can do then we’re better off in.

Instead, all we’re getting are two groups of people shouting “I’m right” at each other.

''Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near''

Surely by now HA you understand that any successes gained in leaving (your only one example other this this anecdotal one is about re-nationalising rail, of which most could be achieved now without leaving) would be dwarfed by the benefits of staying.

''Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left''

Why if this SME is being undercut by a company within the EU wouldn't it be undercut outside the EU also, is the EU the only place to make theses ''widgets''?

Sydney,

The point around EU restrictions around rail renationalisation is fact. The rules imposed by the EU are clear. They don’t allow wholesale nationalisation!! I really don’t know how to put this any other way for you! The examples you have are NOT examples of full nationalisation!

I offered a tangible example of how a business feels that they would benefit by trading outside the EU. I’m sure that there is a possibility that they may be undercut outside the EU too, however, with all due respect to you, I put more credence on their opinion than yours in this matter.

With all due respect you or anyone else having a chat with a moaning business owner wishing things were better or that business would be better ''if only'' is nothing new and does not prove anything.

So I have a chat (admittedly nothing formal, just a quick chat over a coffee) with a business owner who expressed genuine concerns and you simply dismiss this as moaning?

You’ve been keen to mention a few times that nobody has yet given one good reason for leaving the EU...maybe it’s because you’re not listening?

No, it's because over 2 years (and 110 pages here) not you or anyone else has been able to show why leaving would be better option than staying and I will keep asking until someone does, but as I do listen and read I know that will not happen, it's basic first year economics/sales/marketing being within a large wealthy trading block has to be better than being outside. That you or any other individual does not agree does not concern me because if you haven't understood the ramifications for Britain and it's peoples to leave the EU by now you never will. Plenty of people have listened to both sides of the debate and enough are changing their minds to stay, or at least vote on the options.

Recycling misinformation and anecdotes does nothing for a sensible debate and if that's all you have then I wouldn't be putting my money on Britain being a better place following any form of brexit, however if you do feel so inclined I'm sure a bookie somewhere would be happy to relieve you of your hard earned.

[Axholme Lion]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

Audis and VWs are the weapons of choice.

[bobjimwilly]

However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

That right there is the real problem - the fact that so many people who voted Brexit actually believe all we have to do is be "brave" and "show endeavour" to make Brexit a success?!?? No plan, no understanding of the economic predicament we are going to find ourselves in, no estimates for the industries that are most likely to be affecting, or which countries we should (already be) peparing to make trade deals with, just be brave dammit!

What garbage.

[Filo]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

This t**t will carry on driving the one he’s got, just to piss off the rest of the t**ts that haven’t got one

[Axholme Lion]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

This t**t will carry on driving the one he’s got, just to piss off the rest of the t**ts that haven’t got one

I take it you don't go out in ice or snow?

[Filo]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

This t**t will carry on driving the one he’s got, just to piss off the rest of the t**ts that haven’t got one

I take it you don't go out in ice or snow?

Yes the 4 wheel drive is excellent in those conditions

[drfchound]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

This t**t will carry on driving the one he’s got, just to piss off the rest of the t**ts that haven’t got one

I take it you don't go out in ice or snow?

Yes the 4 wheel drive is excellent in those conditions

Yep, me too Filo.
I think you just pissed off another t**t.

[Bentley Bullet]

Why do some drivers like BMW's?  Because they can spell it.

[Filo]

Why do some drivers like BMW's?  Because they can spell it.

Because we can afford them 😜

[SydneyRover]

However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

That right there is the real problem - the fact that so many people who voted Brexit actually believe all we have to do is be "brave" and "show endeavour" to make Brexit a success?!?? No plan, no understanding of the economic predicament we are going to find ourselves in, no estimates for the industries that are most likely to be affecting, or which countries we should (already be) peparing to make trade deals with, just be brave dammit!

What garbage.

Yes lets summon up the ghosts of the british bulldog spirit, reform the commonwealth and we'll be alright. Unfortunately the majority of experts in business, finance, unions/workers conditions do not agree.

[Glyn_Wigley]

However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

That right there is the real problem - the fact that so many people who voted Brexit actually believe all we have to do is be "brave" and "show endeavour" to make Brexit a success?!?? No plan, no understanding of the economic predicament we are going to find ourselves in, no estimates for the industries that are most likely to be affecting, or which countries we should (already be) peparing to make trade deals with, just be brave dammit!

What garbage.

Yes lets summon up the ghosts of the british bulldog spirit, reform the commonwealth and we'll be alright. Unfortunately the majority of experts in business, finance, unions/workers conditions do not agree.

And if you don't agree, you're a fecking traitor.

[Not Now Kato]

I read this on another web site....
 

This could be a bit of fun for the Boris fans......

On Saturday 17th November, Boris Johnson MP was notified of private prosecutor Marcus J Ball’s intention to bring a private prosecution case against him. The case is in accordance with section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, for the alleged offence of misconduct in public office.

Mr Ball has instructed Bankside Commercial to bring on his behalf, the private prosecution against Mr Johnson MP.

Bankside Commercial has retained the services of three barristers from Church Court Chambers: Mr Lewis Power QC, Colin Witcher and Anthony Eskander.

Lawyers speaking on video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z_GMmCtckM

The alleged offence of misconduct in public office arises from statements made and or endorsed by Boris Johnson MP in his capacity as an MP and Mayor of London prior to and following the EU Referendum concerning the cost of EU Membership. Mr Ball alleges that the claim that the UK ‘sends £350 million a week to the EU’ was knowingly false.

Also, that Mr Johnson made or endorsed these statements with the intention of persuading the British Public to vote Leave in the EU Referendum.

Mr Johnson MP has been invited to comment.

Marcus J Ball, private prosecutor

Lewis Power QC has made plain that the legal team are “duty bound not to comment upon the guilt or innocence of Mr Johnson as this is a decision that can only be made within a court of law”

Giles Bright, lead solicitor on the case, stated his agreement with Mr Power QC’s comments and added that: ‘…our role as solicitors for Mr Ball, is to consider a set of facts and assess whether they constitute behaviour that ought to be put before a criminal court to consider. The prosecution team instructed are expert criminal lawyers who have experience of complex cases covering war crimes, terrorism, murder, judicial review and serious fraud prosecutions to name a few”
Giles Bright, of Bankside Commercial, lead solicitor on the case

When asked if the case was an attempt to stop Brexit Mr Ball said that: ‘This is about stopping lying in politics; this is not about stopping Brexit, the courts do not have the power to do that. We do need to stop politicians from lying in any future referendums though. The motivation for this prosecution is a desire to bring a beginning to the end of lying in politics’.

The private prosecution case has been crowdfunded by over 7000 people across four separate crowdfunds since it first began in June 2016.

Mr Ball invites all potential backers to read the information presented on his Crowdfund page. https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/brexitjusticeprosecution 1

Mr Power QC reiterated that ‘Mr Johnson is innocent unless proven guilty within a court of law. The rule of law requires the public and the press to remember this when publishing any comments concerning this case’.

The team awaits comment from Mr Johnson’s lawyers and plan to advance the prosecution with a laying of an information at the Magistrate’s Court at the start of the new year.

Contact info:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MarcusJBall (#BrexitJustice)
Marcus J Ball
marcusjeball@gmail.com
07917 086231
London
www.BrexitJustice.com

Could be interesting.

[Axholme Lion]

If there are no BMW's in the UK what will all the t**ts drive?

This t**t will carry on driving the one he’s got, just to piss off the rest of the t**ts that haven’t got one

I take it you don't go out in ice or snow?

Yes the 4 wheel drive is excellent in those conditions

Subaru, even better.

[RedJ]

I read this on another web site....
 

This could be a bit of fun for the Boris fans......

On Saturday 17th November, Boris Johnson MP was notified of private prosecutor Marcus J Ball’s intention to bring a private prosecution case against him. The case is in accordance with section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, for the alleged offence of misconduct in public office.

Mr Ball has instructed Bankside Commercial to bring on his behalf, the private prosecution against Mr Johnson MP.

Bankside Commercial has retained the services of three barristers from Church Court Chambers: Mr Lewis Power QC, Colin Witcher and Anthony Eskander.

Lawyers speaking on video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z_GMmCtckM

The alleged offence of misconduct in public office arises from statements made and or endorsed by Boris Johnson MP in his capacity as an MP and Mayor of London prior to and following the EU Referendum concerning the cost of EU Membership. Mr Ball alleges that the claim that the UK ‘sends £350 million a week to the EU’ was knowingly false.

Also, that Mr Johnson made or endorsed these statements with the intention of persuading the British Public to vote Leave in the EU Referendum.

Mr Johnson MP has been invited to comment.

Marcus J Ball, private prosecutor

Lewis Power QC has made plain that the legal team are “duty bound not to comment upon the guilt or innocence of Mr Johnson as this is a decision that can only be made within a court of law”

Giles Bright, lead solicitor on the case, stated his agreement with Mr Power QC’s comments and added that: ‘…our role as solicitors for Mr Ball, is to consider a set of facts and assess whether they constitute behaviour that ought to be put before a criminal court to consider. The prosecution team instructed are expert criminal lawyers who have experience of complex cases covering war crimes, terrorism, murder, judicial review and serious fraud prosecutions to name a few”
Giles Bright, of Bankside Commercial, lead solicitor on the case

When asked if the case was an attempt to stop Brexit Mr Ball said that: ‘This is about stopping lying in politics; this is not about stopping Brexit, the courts do not have the power to do that. We do need to stop politicians from lying in any future referendums though. The motivation for this prosecution is a desire to bring a beginning to the end of lying in politics’.

The private prosecution case has been crowdfunded by over 7000 people across four separate crowdfunds since it first began in June 2016.

Mr Ball invites all potential backers to read the information presented on his Crowdfund page. https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/brexitjusticeprosecution 1

Mr Power QC reiterated that ‘Mr Johnson is innocent unless proven guilty within a court of law. The rule of law requires the public and the press to remember this when publishing any comments concerning this case’.

The team awaits comment from Mr Johnson’s lawyers and plan to advance the prosecution with a laying of an information at the Magistrate’s Court at the start of the new year.

Contact info:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MarcusJBall (#BrexitJustice)
Marcus J Ball
marcusjeball@gmail.com
07917 086231
London
www.BrexitJustice.com

Could be interesting.

tl;dr

[Herbert Anchovy]

Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

Here’s a tangible example

Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left.

Unfortunately, it seems that what could have been a fantastic opportunity for UK organisations such as this one, we’re making such a hash of it that nobody is going to benefit! Consequently, if this is the best that our government can do then we’re better off in.

Instead, all we’re getting are two groups of people shouting “I’m right” at each other.

''Only a maniac would believe that there’s no risks to leaving the EU. However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near''

Surely by now HA you understand that any successes gained in leaving (your only one example other this this anecdotal one is about re-nationalising rail, of which most could be achieved now without leaving) would be dwarfed by the benefits of staying.

''Around a year ago I was doing some work for a SME organisation in the West Midlands and the M.D. of that organisation was telling me how they’re continually being undercut by cheaper rivals in the EU. He was incredibly frustrated that he was unable to substantially extend his market outside of Europe, particularly into the US due to EU competition & trade rules. His opinion was the EU isn’t a level playing field so saw real opportunities once we left''

Why if this SME is being undercut by a company within the EU wouldn't it be undercut outside the EU also, is the EU the only place to make theses ''widgets''?

Sydney,

The point around EU restrictions around rail renationalisation is fact. The rules imposed by the EU are clear. They don’t allow wholesale nationalisation!! I really don’t know how to put this any other way for you! The examples you have are NOT examples of full nationalisation!

I offered a tangible example of how a business feels that they would benefit by trading outside the EU. I’m sure that there is a possibility that they may be undercut outside the EU too, however, with all due respect to you, I put more credence on their opinion than yours in this matter.

With all due respect you or anyone else having a chat with a moaning business owner wishing things were better or that business would be better ''if only'' is nothing new and does not prove anything.

So I have a chat (admittedly nothing formal, just a quick chat over a coffee) with a business owner who expressed genuine concerns and you simply dismiss this as moaning?

You’ve been keen to mention a few times that nobody has yet given one good reason for leaving the EU...maybe it’s because you’re not listening?

No, it's because over 2 years (and 110 pages here) not you or anyone else has been able to show why leaving would be better option than staying and I will keep asking until someone does, but as I do listen and read I know that will not happen, it's basic first year economics/sales/marketing being within a large wealthy trading block has to be better than being outside. That you or any other individual does not agree does not concern me because if you haven't understood the ramifications for Britain and it's peoples to leave the EU by now you never will. Plenty of people have listened to both sides of the debate and enough are changing their minds to stay, or at least vote on the options.

Recycling misinformation and anecdotes does nothing for a sensible debate and if that's all you have then I wouldn't be putting my money on Britain being a better place following any form of brexit, however if you do feel so inclined I'm sure a bookie somewhere would be happy to relieve you of your hard earned.

Sydney,

You seem to be unwilling to accept anything that contradicts your narrative, so no, you're not listening. You asked for advantages of leaving and I gave you the example of railway nationalisation,  you've produced a number of incorrect assertions in an attempt to prove me wrong. I don't pretend to know very much about the EU, but I do know about rail nationalisation and I know that I'm right. I also gave you a tangible example of a business owner who shared with me their frustrations of EU membership and you dismissed this as moaning. Yep, nice one.

Oh, by the way, virtually the whole debate is based on anecdotal evidence, however I’ve probided first hand anecdotal evidence rather than copying and pasting from a third party.

Just for the record, I do understand the benefits of EU membership. I DO want the UK to maintain close economic ties with the EU and I DO appreciate that the if Brexit isn't delivered correctly then this could cause huge hardships. However,I do object to political union with the EU.

Anyway, here's another advantage of leaving the EU for you. Did you know that the EU sets the minimum limits on VAT that a member state can implement? Up until 2010, the last Labour Goverment unsuccessfully attempted on numerous occasions to reduce the 5% UK VAT level on domestic fuel. EU rules meant that this wasn't possible.

So, now you have two advantages to leaving the EU.

[Herbert Anchovy]

However I really hoped that, as a country, we would be brave enough and show the endeavour required to make it a success. But we’re not, nowhere near.

That right there is the real problem - the fact that so many people who voted Brexit actually believe all we have to do is be "brave" and "show endeavour" to make Brexit a success?!?? No plan, no understanding of the economic predicament we are going to find ourselves in, no estimates for the industries that are most likely to be affecting, or which countries we should (already be) peparing to make trade deals with, just be brave dammit!

What garbage.

A complete and utter misrepresentation of my point.

Of course I understand that being "brave" and "showing endeavour aren't enough. The point is Brexit CAN provide unique opportunities for the country. Leaving the EU will enable the UK to expand its economic reach around the world. How on earth can that be bad? The world doesn't end at the EU border.

The problem is that, because we had no plan for Brexit, its extremely difficult to develop a long term vision. 

[SydneyRover]

''Sydney,
You seem to be unwilling to accept anything that contradicts your narrative, so no, you're not listening. You asked for advantages of leaving and I gave you the example of railway nationalisation,  you've produced a number of incorrect assertions in an attempt to prove me wrong. I don't pretend to know very much about the EU, but I do know about rail nationalisation and I know that I'm right. I also gave you a tangible example of a business owner who shared with me their frustrations of EU membership and you dismissed this as moaning. Yep, nice one.

Oh, by the way, virtually the whole debate is based on anecdotal evidence, however I’ve probided first hand anecdotal evidence rather than copying and pasting from a third party.

Just for the record, I do understand the benefits of EU membership. I DO want the UK to maintain close economic ties with the EU and I DO appreciate that the if Brexit isn't delivered correctly then this could cause huge hardships. However,I do object to political union with the EU.

Anyway, here's another advantage of leaving the EU for you. Did you know that the EU sets the minimum limits on VAT that a member state can implement? Up until 2010, the last Labour Goverment unsuccessfully attempted on numerous occasions to reduce the 5% UK VAT level on domestic fuel. EU rules meant that this wasn't possible.

So, now you have two advantages to leaving the EU.''

I am quoting your last reply HA as you or others may not wish to trawl through endless quotes, your first point in the above can be equally applied to yourself that you yourself are not listening, not watching the 700,000 that marched or the more than 1m that have signed the petition, or the endless stream of business, government and economic experts, far more than the leave side that condemn it, and to again use one of your previous statements, I would rather take their word than yours.

So you have come up with one thing, nationalisation of rail and tell me that the government can't do it, well labor say they can, and again following what I have read about your brexit ideas I am rather inclined to believe them than yourself. And yes I do ask for single credible advantages of leaving the EU, but in itself is a single reason for leaving good enough? that I didn't ask.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45609604

Also I would ask that any claim you make about vat or anything to be least be supported by some evidence not just your own words to show good faith in the debate so I and others understand there is some basis for what you say and it's not another ''informal chat'', the source and merits can then be discussed better. You don't have to of course as this has been the modus operandi of brexiters from the beginning to make unsubstantiated claims and to use a lot of emotive but meaningless terms such as regaining sovereignty and independence from the EU, totally ignoring the fact that Britain has been involved with all EU negotiations that lead led to the legislation and regulations that are now in place.

I am assuming you didn't read (I may be incorrect) my link about:

''It started with fake news, but now any unpalatable fact is fair game for the ‘thought incinerator’'

Which tends to support the overwhelming evidence that brexiters of any shape/form have distorted truth and made for more unsubstantiated claims (not necessarily you) that those that wish to stay in the EU and be part of modern Europe and not return to some mythical period where Britain was described as great. There are many sides to that argument too.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/20/brexiteers-trump-language-fake-news

If you get tired of the links I provide I do it partly to show that evidence and opinion coming from credible sources far outweighs anything credible coming from the brexit side of the debate and I give you Treeza May, Boris and Reese-Mogg as examples of providers of brexit discourse, and partly because If I see-hear anything of interest about brexit or whatever I can then try and cross check it from another source.

Warm regards SR

[SydneyRover]

It doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence in May or her negotiators?, but there again this is the party that has seen unprecedented growth in banks …..food. banks that is. Brought to your suburb by the team that gave us ‘Austerity’, making Britain grate again.

‘’She also refused to say that the deal would be better for the UK than the status quo of EU membership’’

’The prime minister was dealt a fresh blow ahead of the summit when Dominic Raab, who resigned as her Brexit secretary last week, said the proposed exit deal was worse than remaining in the EU’’

‘’The prime minister also refused to say definitively that she believes her Brexit deal is better for the UK than remaining in the EU.
She said: “I honestly believe that I’m getting a good deal for the UK’’

‘’Pressed again on whether she was confident the UK would be better off under the terms of her deal than under EU membership, she said only: “I think we will be better off in a situation, which we’ll have outside the European Union, where we have control of all those things and are able to trade around the rest of the world’’

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-deal-vote-parliament-resign-bbc-5live-radio-interview-phone-in-a8648916.html

[Bentley Bullet]

If Theresa May was to say outright that her brexit deal would be better for the UK than the status quo of EU membership then she'd be equally as guilty of future conjecture as you and your mates on here.

[SydneyRover]

If Theresa May was to say outright that her brexit deal would be better for the UK than the status quo of EU membership then she'd be equally as guilty of future conjecture as you and your mates on here.

I'll take that as a comment and reply, if following 2 years of high level negotiations with I presume the best team of negotiators at your disposal and a deal consisting of 500 pages that the government should know inside out and she can't or refuses to tell the people of Britain what the effects of this deal will be she then she needs to resign. There is a deal on the table which has been negotiated, there is or should be modelling and recommendations that has guided the government on what the best course of action is to take and what the likely outcomes will be, and again if the government can't tell us then they should call an election and get a fresh mandate from the people to accept or not the deal on the table.

[wilts rover]

If Theresa May was to say outright that her brexit deal would be better for the UK than the status quo of EU membership then she'd be equally as guilty of future conjecture as you and your mates on here.

That was one of the questions she was asked by a caller during her Radio 5 piece on Friday lunchtime and she refused to answer it. Three times. How is your deal better than remaining in the EU? Her final answer was something along the lines of 'I can't say it will be better but it will be different'.

[Bentley Bullet]

If Theresa May was to say outright that her brexit deal would be better for the UK than the status quo of EU membership then she'd be equally as guilty of future conjecture as you and your mates on here.

That was one of the questions she was asked by a caller during her Radio 5 piece on Friday lunchtime and she refused to answer it. Three times. How is your deal better than remaining in the EU? Her final answer was something along the lines of 'I can't say it will be better but it will be different'.

What more could she say without guessing?

[bpoolrover]

Dianne abbots take on brexit http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46315250

[SydneyRover]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/