Brexit discussion

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Damien

Many Leavers in the Government would accept continuing payments for single market access so long as they had control of immigration and left the jurisdiction of the ECJ. There problem has never really been about the money.

Ah, the old one foot in one foot out that remainers seem to think is an alternative.

Dream on, there is no way the EU will allow that.

Originally Posted by pip08456

Ah, the old one foot in one foot out that remainers seem to think is an alternative.

Dream on, there is no way the EU will allow that.

No they won't allow it. just pointing out the money is nothing in the scheme of things.

[pip08456]

There money is very much at the heart of the scheme things, the EU negotiators won't move forward until the money matter is settled.

Originally Posted by pip08456

There money is very much at the heart of the scheme things, the EU negotiators won't move forward until the money matter is settled.

'the' money being the £350 million.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

A surefire stimulus to the UK economy. Everybody agreed the pound was overvalued. Yet another post adhering firmly to Sturgeon's Law.

Yes, one of the reasons so many countries in the EU have suffered so much. Germany loves the Euro because it keeps their exports far cheaper than would be the case if they had retained the DM. Of course the likes of Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal etc. would benefit from being able to revalue their currencies and set their own interest rates but they can't. They suffer whilst Germany exports more...

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Mick

Oh please, is that the best you can do ?

You remainers put it where you like, it was still BS, the 350M, figure was misleading but not totally untrue, we do pay a hefty membership fee.

It was a big fat lie, no more, no less. A lie on the side of the bus and a lie perpetuated at the time and since the referendum. Anyone who tried to call out this lie was shouting down as 'Project Fear' doom monger.

Worked though....

Speaking of lies, I see David Davies is suggesting that there aren't 58 impact assessments after all - https://twitter.com/faisalislam/stat...02263049744385 So we have a few possibilities...

• The reports do exist but David Davies is suggesting they don't which is a lie
• The reports don't exist but Davies previously suggested they did, which is a lie

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

It was a big fat lie, no more, no less. A lie on the side of the bus and a lie perpetuated at the time and since the referendum. Anyone who tried to call out this lie was shouting down as 'Project Fear' doom monger.

Worked though....

Speaking of lies, I see David Davies is suggesting that there aren't 58 impact assessments after all - https://twitter.com/faisalislam/stat...02263049744385 So we have a few possibilities...

• The reports do exist but David Davies is suggesting they don't which is a lie
• The reports don't exist but Davies previously suggested they did, which is a lie

Oh, the information certainly exists. The Govt. just don't want the public to see the real impacts of Brexit. It's for our own good, it would only depress us....

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Oh, the information certainly exists. The Govt. just don't want the public to see the real impacts of Brexit. It's for our own good, it would only depress us....

I agree 100% that the information exists unless there is a staggering level of incompetence by HMG. As us 'remoaners' have been told we are wrong so many times about Brexit being a potential disaster, I would have thought our pro-Brexit friends would be shouting from the rooftops to see these documents to prove us wrong.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

It was a big fat lie, no more, no less. A lie on the side of the bus and a lie perpetuated at the time and since the referendum. Anyone who tried to call out this lie was shouting down as 'Project Fear' doom monger.

Worked though....

Speaking of lies, I see David Davies is suggesting that there aren't 58 impact assessments after all - https://twitter.com/faisalislam/stat...02263049744385 So we have a few possibilities...

• The reports do exist but David Davies is suggesting they don't which is a lie
• The reports don't exist but Davies previously suggested they did, which is a lie

You really need to get over this. Compare a statement on the side of a bus issued by a campaign group (NOT even a party, let alone a government) to the official diet of lies and doom fed to us by our PM and Chancellor of the time and their buddies like Obama, including all the media coverage they got and the letter they sent sent to every household explaining how awful it would all be. Sorry but no matter how many times you try to assert that the difference between the actual figure and the quoted £350m pw was the decisive factor, the lies told by both sides do not compare.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Osem

You really need to get over this. Compare a statement on the side of a bus issued by a campaign group (NOT even a party, let alone a government) to the official diet of lies and doom fed to us by our PM and Chancellor of the time and their buddies like Obama, including all the media coverage they got and the letter they sent sent to every household explaining how awful it would all be. Sorry but no matter how many times you try to assert that the difference between the actual figure and the quoted £350m pw was the decisive factor, the two do not compare.

The remainers quote one figure and the leavers quote another. One is the gross figure and the other is the net figure.

Both are correct in their own way.

[jonbxx]

There is a difference between a prediction that turns out to be incorrect and a figure that be be factually verified to be a lie. The words were ‘we send the EU £350 million a week’. We don’t now and never have sent the EU £350 million.

It’s a moot point now that it’s all over but to say it’s not a lie or, at best, an incorrect number based on incorrect research is wrong.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

There is a difference between a prediction that turns out to be incorrect and a figure that be be factually verified to be a lie. The words were ‘we send the EU £350 million a week’. We don’t now and never have sent the EU £350 million.

It’s a moot point now that it’s all over but to say it’s not a lie or, at best, an incorrect number based on incorrect research is wrong.

Well, maybe a bit of poetic licence was used there, but potentially, our rebate could be withdrawn, and so the £350,000 could be the figure we'd be liable to pay to the EU. However, regardless of whether you go by the net or the gross figure, the amount of money we are currently sending to the EU is huge and better spent on our priorities, and the NHS is one example of that.

I, for one, saw that as an example and not a commitment, as some insist. The Leave campaigners were of mixed political colours and therefore obviously had differences between them as to how the money could be spent. They were not in a position to commit the Government of the day, quite honestly. They were not there to write a manifesto!

[Osem]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, maybe a bit of poetic licence was used there, but potentially, our rebate could be withdrawn, and so the £350,000 could be the figure we'd be liable to pay to the EU. However, regardless of whether you go by the net or the gross figure, the amount of money we are currently sending to the EU is huge and better spent on our priorities, and the NHS is one example of that.

I, for one, saw that as an example and not a commitment, as some insist. The Leave campaigners were of mixed political colours and therefore obviously had differences between them as to how the money could be spent. They were not in a position to commit the Government of the day, quite honestly. They were not there to write a manifesto!

Correct, the 'deceit' was in the sum mentioned (net v gross etc) but there never was a pledge, just an aspiration as to how that money could be used. A campaign group isn't in a position to pledge anything and everyone knows that. Only governments can do that and it certainly wasn't one of Cameron and Osborne's - they were too busy trying to scare people into staying in.

[jonbxx]

The rebate could only be withdrawn if the UK agreed to it as changes to rebate required unanimity of the European Council. The rebate is part of the Multiannual Financial Framework - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36085281

It is a very good point that the leave campaign was in no position to make promises as it wasn’t the government. I didn’t have a great deal of time for David Cameron before the referendum but I did admire the fact he resigned as he was a supporter of remaining in the EU

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

The rebate could only be withdrawn if the UK agreed to it as changes to rebate required unanimity of the European Council. The rebate is part of the Multiannual Financial Framework - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36085281

It is a very good point that the leave campaign was in no position to make promises as it wasn’t the government. I didn’t have a great deal of time for David Cameron before the referendum but I did admire the fact he resigned as he was a supporter of remaining in the EU

Did you read the bit about the UK losing its veto?

Technically, our agreement would be needed to scrap it altogether, but you never know what barrel we might be held over in the future to extract that agreement.

And frankly, if Jeremy came to power, you can kiss goodbye to that rebate!