[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Mick

That's part of the issue, there are hard line remainers wanting to keep one foot in the door, by staying in the single market and customs union and this is not acceptable at all because this is not considered leaving.

Not acceptable to you and not considered leaving by you. It obeys the result of the referendum just fine and, across the populace, the 'Norway' option is, or at least was, the most acceptable option.

---------- Post added at 13:41 ---------- Previous post was at 13:38 ----------

Originally Posted by Ramrod

No, democracy doesn't demand that. We were told that if we voted out, we would be out. It was made crystal clear to us all before we voted.

Yes, democracy does demand that. Democracy is an ongoing process that doesn't stop at one point and no democratic decision should be unable to be undone by democracy.

EDIT: Wait a minute? It's hard line to want to remain in the SM/CU? Dread to think what the opinion of those who want to remain in the EU and all its institutions is.

Hard line is those people who want to leave now, no deal, nothing, in complete contravention of the evidence. Flights would be grounded, we'd have no way of obtaining nuclear fuel, we'd have no way of trading internationally having left the CU as no-one has systems in place to trade with the UK and the UK has no systems in place to trade worldwide but it's hard line to want to remain in the SM/CU?

EEA membership carried 2/3rds support pre-referendum and is the least-damaging option economically for the UK while permitting the UK to make its own trade deals, including with the EU, and retain the benefits of the Single Market. It does not mean remaining in the Customs Union so Liam Fox gets to carry on his taxpayer funded jollies, done via EFTA it means dispute resolution is not through the ECJ. It opens up Articles 112-113 of the EEA agreement permitting unilateral measures to control FoM, which is not unlimited, and who knows perhaps even the immigration target obsessive Theresa May would direct the Home Office to use the powers we've always had to control immigration from the EEA - have no job you're out after 6 months, crack down on abuse of self-employment, properly count people in an out.

Pretty funny that so many of those more zealous about Freedom of Movement of labour have been huge fans of a former Home Secretary that never bothered to enforce the controls she did have over immigration from the EU.

---------- Post added at 13:59 ---------- Previous post was at 13:41 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

Yes, we did. Why would it need to be scary? Why would it need to be dire chaos? Why is it that parting with the EU can't be better than what we had within, albeit different? Only those who refuse to contemplate the reality of the EU paint that picture. Leaving the EU means nothing unless those we're trying to negotiate it want to make it harder than it needs to be and create problems for both sides. The Eurocrats would want to do that to send messages to other nations who might be tempted to leave.

It doesn't need to be scary unless we make a mess up of it, which we are doing.

As far as trade and relationships with the EU goes it can't be better than what we had within.

The UK negotiating team agreed months ago to the sequencing of the talks: financial settlement, rights of citizens and Northern Ireland to be resolved before talks on future relationship. Shouldn't have agreed to that if we weren't going to follow it.

You'll forgive me if I don't take too seriously the views of someone posting the kind of material you did on the Catalonia thread as far as the UK-EU relationship goes. I see absolutely no acknowledgement that the UK isn't helping itself in these negotiations, blame being shifted to 100% the other side, and the attitude that they should give us all we want and be grateful.

That's not happening. Time to get real, we're running out of time and must get this right.

I'm aware some on this forum are of the opinion that they will never regret their vote to leave the European Union, presumably whether the economy see a recession, trade becomes difficult, unemployment spikes, etc, they'll still be proud that they stuck it to the Eurocrats, but I am not one of them.

I never foresaw anything other than EEA membership as the result, the most appropriate place for a nation that should've never left EFTA.

---------- Post added at 14:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

We didn't join the EU until 1974 so it's relevent to consider the UK's fortunes in the early seventies to that shortly after joining: The UK experienced the highest inflation rate in it's history for several years peaking at a mind boggling 25%, stagnant growth and industrial chaos. A co-incidence?

Yes. I believe you are old enough to remember the issues surrounding the UK's economy at that time. I believe unions received much of the blame, closed shops, heavy state subsidy of industries, too much was nationalised, etc. To try and imply that the UK joining the EEC was to blame for the UK's extreme structural problems, at the time, and by implication that the UK had no issues before 1973 (we joined the EEC in 73, not 74) that would be responsible is crazy.

Pretty funny that people blamed Labour and were fans of Thatcher for what she did to transform our economy and apparently the 70s are now the EU, or EEC as it was then's fault.

EU evidently caused the UK's structural problems of the 60s and 70s, including the 1972 miners' strike, Three-Day Week, the worldwide energy crisis and the extreme industrial strife of the 70s.

The EU have a lot to be criticised for. That however is a silly insinuation backed by zero evidence.

---------- Post added at 14:21 ---------- Previous post was at 14:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

The UK can negotiate perfectly adequate trade deals with other nations or trade with the EU just the same as many other non-EU countries do without a trade deal. How on Earth does anyone else survive outside the EU I wonder?

Mostly within multi-lateral trading blocs.



Your suggestion that a 'perfectly adequate' trade deal along the lines of, say, CETA, would be okay for the UK is simply wrong. That would be second only to 'no deal' in terms of damage to our economy. Whether you like it or not our economy is heavily intertwined with the EEA's and untangling that without causing damage takes time and, if the end result is not a deep trade deal well beyond a standard FTA, a lot of time.

I've no interest in changing your mind, it's very clear your opinion is not based on evidence so further evidence isn't going to do anything. In common with many others that desire the 'hardest of hard' exits from the EU you're unable to supply anything but platitudes and 'faith' to support it.