Brexit: Article 50 Has Been Triggered !

[daveeb]

Some of my work is involved in this (Euratom) area. There is currently massive collaboration with the EU. We don't have the depth of expertise to go it alone properly.

It's caused much head scratching even amongst the handful of Brexiteers about the implications of leaving.

Originally Posted by daveeb

Some of my work is involved in this (Euratom) area. There is currently massive collaboration with the EU. We don't have the depth of expertise to go it alone properly.

It's caused much head scratching even amongst the handful of Brexiteers about the implications of leaving.

Not this Brexiteer head, it's not.

It appears to me some people on the remain side, are putting arguments forward as if we are still in the phase of deciding whether to leave or not.

Sorry to bring you back to reality, that ship has sailed some time ago, we are leaving, article 50 has been invoked and thankfully, we are on our way out of the corrupt, unbalanced and failing pile of garbage.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Mick

Not this Brexiteer head, it's not.

It appears to me some people on the remain side, are putting arguments forward as if we are still in the phase of deciding whether to leave or not.

Sorry to bring you back to reality, that ship has sailed some time ago, we are leaving, article 50 has been invoked and thankfully, we are on our way out of the corrupt, unbalanced and failing pile of garbage.

If collaboration about security, atomic research or whatever else is required there's no reason it shouldn't be agreed and acted upon after Brexit. The way some people are talking anyone would think we were going to cut ourselves off from Europe entirely and vice versa. Cutting off noses to spite faces isn't very grown up so I'm sure both sides will see our mutual interests in such areas and carry on. Why wouldn't they?

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by daveeb

Some of my work is involved in this (Euratom) area. There is currently massive collaboration with the EU. We don't have the depth of expertise to go it alone properly.

It's caused much head scratching even amongst the handful of Brexiteers about the implications of leaving.

Rolls-Royce seems unhappy about this:

Rolls-Royce calls for Britain to stay in Euratom and EU aviation agency

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that it was not a deliberate attempt to deceive. They simply didn't take into account the rebate, which of course could be reinstated further down the line.

Had they quoted the figure without the rebate, it would have been just as effective, so why people are obsessing about the precise amount really shows how desperate the remainers are now.

The point is, a huge amount of extra money will be at our disposal when we leave this great monolithic bureaucracy, and we can decide to spend it on the NHS, housing, poverty, whatever we like. Plus, we will be able to exploit world markets without being tied down by the EU.

I think a lot of remainers also believe that trade with the EU will be stopped or at least severely impacted when we leave. I am sure they will be pleasantly surprised, because that is not going to happen.

So you are saying that the people in charge of the Leave campaign were just grossly incompetent and were unable to do basic mathematics?

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by Mick

Not this Brexiteer head, it's not.

It appears to me some people on the remain side, are putting arguments forward as if we are still in the phase of deciding whether to leave or not.

Sorry to bring you back to reality, that ship has sailed some time ago, we are leaving, article 50 has been invoked and thankfully, we are on our way out of the corrupt, unbalanced and failing pile of garbage.

Well it's a thread on Brexit so why wouldn't we discuss it.

It's crazy that these things weren't discussed in parliament and put out to the public before the vote...to expect people to vote on something with no idea of the consequences was madness (and still is).

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by daveeb

Well it's a thread on Brexit so why wouldn't we discuss it.

It's crazy that these things weren't discussed in parliament and put out to the public before the vote...to expect people to vote on something with no idea of the consequences was madness (and still is).

What part of exiting the EU didn't you understand?

As Osem has stated just because we are leaving doesn't mean collaboration will cease. Issues like this will be part of the negotiations.

Until negotiations are concluded all you will get is uninformed opinion based on speculation.

[heero_yuy]

EU membership is NOT a prerequisite for participation in these other European organisations. Just another remoaner straw man.

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by pip08456

What part of exiting the EU didn't you understand?

As Osem has stated just because we are leaving doesn't mean collaboration will cease. Issues like this will be part of the negotiations.

Until negotiations are concluded all you will get is uninformed opinion based on speculation.

Where did i say we're not exiting ?
What part of discussing the implications of leaving don't you understand.

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:02 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

If collaboration about security, atomic research or whatever else is required there's no reason it shouldn't be agreed and acted upon after Brexit. The way some people are talking anyone would think we were going to cut ourselves off from Europe entirely and vice versa. Cutting off noses to spite faces isn't very grown up so I'm sure both sides will see our mutual interests in such areas and carry on. Why wouldn't they?

One problem with the EURATOM agreement is it requires free movement of scientists in both directions. So yes you're right about mutual interests but the free movement issue will be a major hurdle.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that it was not a deliberate attempt to deceive.

It was. They were told on numerous occasions by the ONS and other bodies it was wrong but did not correct it.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It was. They were told on numerous occasions by the ONS and other bodies it was wrong but did not correct it.

Indeed. They were also told at the time by one of the more honest members of their own campaign team, Sarah Wollaston MP. The outright lie and deception on the £350million figure persuaded her to change sides. Shame more didn't listen or were as honest as her.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36485464

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

What part of exiting the EU didn't you understand?

Why such a cantankerous statement? We're all having a healthy democratic debate and probably agree about 99% of other things in life. Let's keep the UK strong by remaining nice to one another and keeping the great in Great Britain.

---------- Post added at 20:39 ---------- Previous post was at 20:36 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

Indeed. They were also told at the time by one of the more honest members of their own campaign team, Sarah Wollaston MP. The outright lie and deception on the £350million figure persuaded her to change sides. Shame more didn't listen or were as honest as her.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36485464

As Mick said, a fewer £100m a week wouldn't have altered his view. It's just a real shame that the campaign felt that the British public could be repeatedly lied to without any danger of any repercussions whatsoever.

---------- Post added at 21:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:39 ----------

UK is paying the EU less than half the sum claimed by Brexit campaigners, reveal new figures. UK’s net contribution falls to its lowest level for five years – about £156m a week.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7881286.html

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

UK is paying the EU less than half the sum claimed by Brexit campaigners, reveal new figures. UK’s net contribution falls to its lowest level for five years – about £156m a week.

Strewth, that's less that one Neymar although even his 'net contribution' will be quite a bit less than ours

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

So you are saying that the people in charge of the Leave campaign were just grossly incompetent and were unable to do basic mathematics?

No, I'm saying they took the figure that applies before the rebate is taken into account.

Don't think for one minute that the rebate would last forever, it was simply a quick fix which the Eurocrats are dying to end.

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:03 ----------

Originally Posted by daveeb

Some of my work is involved in this (Euratom) area. There is currently massive collaboration with the EU. We don't have the depth of expertise to go it alone properly.

It's caused much head scratching even amongst the handful of Brexiteers about the implications of leaving.

Like most remainers ( I trust I'm not generalising!) you seem to believe that there can be no relationship at all with a body once you are no longer a member.

Listen to the government's proposals and do something about that tunnel vision you suffer from!

---------- Post added at 16:16 ---------- Previous post was at 16:08 ----------

Originally Posted by daveeb

Well it's a thread on Brexit so why wouldn't we discuss it.

It's crazy that these things weren't discussed in parliament and put out to the public before the vote...to expect people to vote on something with no idea of the consequences was madness (and still is).

The consequences? What, you mean free trade, an end to freedom of movement, getting our sovereignty back, etc? Sorry, the confusion is with the remainers, who cannot get to grips with radical change.

You seem to believe that there should have been a detailed plan for Brexit prior to the referendum. That was never a practical option because leavers comprised a number of political parties, all with their own agendas, and the same on the remain side.

We were voting on the principal. It's up to the politicians to agree on the detail.

---------- Post added at 16:19 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It was. They were told on numerous occasions by the ONS and other bodies it was wrong but did not correct it.

It was the correct figure, which did not take into account the rebate, which is not a permanent fixture. It wouldn't have made any difference to voting if the lower figure had been quoted - it was still a huge sum which is better in our coffers than the black hole which is the EU.

---------- Post added at 16:21 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------

Originally Posted by pip08456

What part of exiting the EU didn't you understand?

As Osem has stated just because we are leaving doesn't mean collaboration will cease. Issues like this will be part of the negotiations.

Until negotiations are concluded all you will get is uninformed opinion based on speculation.

Agreed. But still the speculation continues...

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why such a cantankerous statement? We're all having a healthy democratic debate and probably agree about 99% of other things in life. Let's keep the UK strong by remaining nice to one another and keeping the great in Great Britain.

What cantankerous statement? I asked a genuine question. That's why there was a question mark at the end of the sentance and not an exclamation mark!