Member Info for kenj

"It's got nothing to do with being stupid (your words not mine)."

I did not actually use the word "stupid" either Camkike, but you words below, which I commented upon, seem to be very close to saying just that.

"many of whom don't really grasp what they are voting on with very simplistic views held,"

"We don't leave, nothing changes except some disgruntled voters, many of whom don't really grasp what they are voting on with very simplistic views held, if they did realise might think twice. (Not all) "

So Camkite, the Remainers DO understand what they are voting for, because they are super inteligent, but the Brexiteers are thick! Ah I understand your argument at last!

European Union Democracy In Action

"Negotiations to modify EU institutions began in 2001, resulting first in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which would have repealed the existing European treaties and replaced them with a "constitution". Although ratified by a majority of member states, this was abandoned after being rejected by 54.67% of French voters on 29 May 2005 and then by 61.54% of Dutch voters on 1 June 2005. After a "period of reflection", member states agreed instead to maintain the existing treaties, but to amend them, salvaging a number of the reforms that had been envisaged in the constitution. An amending "reform" treaty was drawn up and signed in Lisbon in 2007. It was originally intended to have been ratified by all member states by the end of 2008. This timetable failed, primarily due to the initial rejection of the Treaty in June 2008 by the Irish electorate, a decision which was reversed in a second referendum in October 2009 after Ireland secured a number of concessions related to the treaty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

"As soon as the Irish people's ballots were counted in June, their rejection of Lisbon was treated as the "wrong" answer... The notion that the Irish "got it wrong" exposes gobsmacking ignorance about democracy in the upper echelons of the EU."

"We've been here before. When French and Dutch voters rejected the European constitution in 2005 (and according to Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the current Lisbon treaty is the "same as the constitution"), they were sneeringly insulted by their betters in Brussels. Neil Kinnock said it was a "triumph of ignorance". Andrew Duff, Liberal Democrat MEP, labelled the "rejectionists" as an "odd bunch of racists, xenophobes, nationalists, communists, the disappointed centre left and the generally pissed off". He asked whether it is wise to "submit the EU Constitution to a lottery of uncoordinated national plebiscites".
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/dec/13/eu-ireland-lisbon-treaty

"Proposed in 2007, the Lisbon Treaty was ratified by most member states in 2008, but a referendum in Ireland—the only country that put the Lisbon agreement to a public vote - rejected it on June 12, 2008, thus jeopardizing the entire treaty. More than a year later, on October 2, 2009, Ireland held a second referendum, which passed."
https://www.britannica.com/event/Lisbon-Treaty

"My point is that I find it hard to want to be a member of an organisation that sticks 100% to its rules and box ticking and will not negotiate or compromise"

Exactly KNIGELK.
In 3 years the EU have offered us nothing, not to David Cameron, and not to Theresa May either. So what is the point in trying to negotiate further to refine this agreement? Theresa's deal has not even been approved by the 27 other member states. The French are known to want changes to the fishing agreement, and Spain want concessions re Gibraltar.

If we accept the shoddy deal we have been offered, then we will be hit with demands to concede further before France, Spain and I am sure many others agree to sign off on the deal. The only way to get a grown up dialogue with Europe is to leave, and elect to trade under WTO rules.

Camkite,
The UK's fishing rights were surrendered by Ted Heath when we joined the Common Market / EEC. Many small UK fishing ports suffered a serious decline, after our territorial waters were shared out to our European partners, often with larger fishing boats than our own. The reason why French and Spanish fishermen wanted access to our waters was because they had over fished their own waters, and seriously depleted fish numbers.

I do not live near the sea, so I have not been personally affected by this, but if we gave these rights away to join the EU, I see no valid reason not to reclaim them when we leave. If we later choose to grant fishing rights to foreign vessels, then so be it, but it should be our decision alone, as it would be for any sovereign nation.

KNIGELK,
Like you, I do not want another vote, but if there was to be one it has to be kept clear and simple. Having 3 or 4 options which much of the population (including our politicians) will not understand, will lead to apathy and confusion. Most of us (irrespective of which side we are on) are bored shitless by Brexit as it is, and just want it quickly resolved.

Another vote and then to start negotiating again with an organisation that is not prepared to give an inch, will mean another couple of years before we can escape. So forget March 2019, we will be looking at 2021 at least. All this time we will of course still be members and paying our dues to the EU, and taking our orders from them.

Camkite,
We clearly have a different view of independence, as you have rubbished just about all of the 4 points I stated.

I won't bother arguing them all, as it would take too long, but immigration ???
Open borders and unchecked immigration is good for companies as it means an endless supply of cheap labour. This is why the CBI, FT, and many company bosses do not want Brexit. However, this comes at a cost. Our children will find it more difficult to find jobs. And if they do the wages will be suppressed by the glut of cheap foreign labour. This is not a prophecy, it has been happening for years.

The other main problem is too many people chasing too few resources, eg: housing, hospitals, schools, road traffic, infrastructure, etc. We cannot build new homes fast enough for the current population. Our schools are running out of places, hospitals cannot cope, and the traffic in many towns and cities is grinding to a halt. Net immigration for the year ended March 2018 was 271,000. I am not a racist, but this is unsustainable. The UK is full.

At present we have one of the lowest unemployment figures in Europe. If we carry on like this, employment figures will fall. High unemployment is likely to lead to civil unrest. This is not the England that I want my children and grandchildren to grow up in.

" Hope you're not getting your info from the daily fail kenj."

Camkite,
If you read The Daily Mail editorials you will find that they are so fervently behind Theresa May and her deal, that they almost make the Financial Times look timid and undecided.

Camkite, Brexit to me means;
1. We take control of our borders
2. We re-establish our territorial waters and fishing rights
3. We are able to make trade deals with whoever we choose
4. We make and enforce our own laws.
This would seem a basic requirement for any free and independent country.

All this hard and soft Brexit tosh is created by the EU who are desperate to keep the UK (the second largest net contributor to the EU budget), within the EU. They have made it as difficult as possible for us to leave and created a position where we can have a soft Brexit if we pay them a fortune, and continue to be tied to them and restricted in what we can and cannot do.

Alternatively, we are threatened with a hard Brexit, where all sorts of nasty things will happen to us if we are not part of their club. Yes they can make if hard for us to trade with EU countries, and there may be some initial delays and problems at the ports, but if they make it difficult for us we can make it difficult for them. Do not forget that there is a huge imbalance of trade between the EU and us. Consequently, any trade blockages or wars will hurt them more than us. And a simple 10% WTO import / export tax will enrich the UK Treasury.

Camkite,
Can you give me a half decent argument as to why these things will happen?
Remember all the doom and gloom predictions made before the referendum as to what would happen with a NO vote? Did they happen - NO, and it is the same people and organisations that are making the new threats.

"if remainers lost I would bet a lot would indeed pipe down, myself included."

You did lose Camkite, but you have not piped down. Why should we believe it would be any different after another vote?

The Country voted to leave in 2015. We are still waiting! This joke of a deal is not BREXIT in any way shape or form. It is a sell out, by politicians and civil servants who never wanted us to leave in the first place.

I have nothing against another vote, but not until they have delivered on the first vote. When we have been out for a couple of years, and people can truly asses the difference, then let's have a vote.

You are probably too young to remember Camkite, but we joined the Common Market (EEC) in 1973, and then had a vote 2 years later in 1975 to ratify or revoke that decision. People then who were on the losing side simply accepted the vote, they did not b1tch about it, and do all they can to reverse it.

"I don't understand why people refer to it being un democratic to have a second vote apart from that being the rhetoric coming from those said politicians, it is far from un democratic, in fact it is one of the most democratic things that could happen in the circumstances."

There is nothing remotely democratic about having vote after vote until you get the result you want. The EU are past masters at this maneuver; Ireland and Holland to name but two examples.

"None of this denies the fact that staying in the EU (although we have to bite our tounge in some instances - thats life) is the best outcome for our economy & realistically also status...."

Agreed, we are not the empire we once were, but that does make it a FACT that staying in the EU is our best option. It is merely YOUR opinion, and one that I completely disagree with. I am happy to debate this issue with anyone, but not if they present their personal views as facts.

ATB kenj

Watched Channel 4 news this evening. There was a great spat / debate between Alastair Campbell and Nigel Farage. They both hated Theresa's deal, but for completely different reasons - very entertaining.

"the EU's negotiating hand has always been far stronger than ours from the outset and there was never any real hope of a "good" deal"

Camkite, from memory the EU opened negotiations by demanding a £28bn fee, when we conceded to that they recalculated it, and said it would be £39bn, which we also agreed to pay. Only a complete fool starts negotiations by agreeing to the other party's charges before they had given us anything. Still what can you expect when Teresa May and many of the negotiators team, including senior civil servants were remain voters?

A second vote should not be held, as a remain win would level the score at 1 all. The Eu would of course love this, as their default policy for any vote they do not like, is to demand a re-vote.

As regards the civil unrest that you speak of, I don't see that staying in protects us from this. There have been protests in Paris and Brussels, both staunch EU members. Sooner or later, the EU is destined to pull itself apart, just like the Soviet Union. As the second largest net contributor, we would do well to be far away from the EU by then.

Theresa bottled the vote on Tuesday, knowing she would lose heavily, she then fled the country to beg the EU for a few more crumbs. She is very unlikely to be offered anything of consequence, and the vote she has put off will have to go ahead on much the same terms.

Remainers, leavers and politicians of either divide know that this "deal" is a bag of worms. It is not BREXIT. It is a half in - half out fudge, that leaves us shackled to the EU for as long as they decide, and without any further say in the running of the EU. The terms we have been offered have still to be agreed by the other 27 members, who will insist on further concessions eg. changes to the proposed return of UK fishing rights.

Mrs May has completely failed to honour her pledge "Brexit means Brexit". She has no one else to blame for this and now looks like paying the ultimate price. The EU have made it perfectly clear over the last 3 years that they will concede just about nothing. The only sensible solution now, is to leave without a deal and use World Trade Organization rules. A 10% WTO rate will hugely benefit the Treasury as we import far more from Europe than we export to them.

Germany in particular will now be very keen to negotiate some form of a trade deal, and the EU could then be expected to negotiate with us as equals, instead of treating the UK as a naughty child who must be punished, to deter other nations from following our bad example.

I totally agree Camkite, we certainly will not be leaving under Theresa's deal.
Good luck with selling the yellow vests. Now that Boris' water cannons have been scrapped, our police force will have little chance of controlling any Paris style riots. They are too scared to take on the traveling community, let alone a full blown riot. Most of them are too busy investigating hate crimes, such as school children using the N word, or charging those who racially abused Raheem Sterling at Chelsea on Saturday. And the others, who aren't on traffic duties, spend most of their time investigating alleged sex crimes committed by people who are long dead. Where did it all go so horribly wrong?

In today's Mail on Sunday, Jeremy Paxman says that his dog could have got us a better deal.

You are right KNIGELK it is not a deal.
In my opinion it is little more than a framework of ideas that will need lengthy further discussions. As you said they gave David Cameron nothing after around 1 years of talks, which is why the British people voted to leave. And they have given Theresa May little but scraps and hollow promises either. If we are foolish enough to accept this agreement, I am sure that the EU will be even harder nosed in the following negotiations.

We voted to exit in June 2016, and Article 50 (notice to leave the EU) was triggered in March 2017. This was to be completed in two years, our exit to be on March 2019. The stitch up we are being offered, is nothing remotely like an exit, and we are no nearer knowing when we will actually be free.

I don't know why everyone seems so scared of leaving, especially when we buy far more from Europe than we sell to them. We managed to trade successfully with the world before 1975, so why can we not do that now? You don't ask for permission to leave a club you have joined, you simply quit. I appreciate that we are liable for some future pension payments etc, but £38bn, really??

If you have not read the link I posted KNIGELK, please do. It is extremely an well written informative view from one of our old trading partners..

Teressa's proposed deal is full of holes and bland statements as Jeremy Corbyn pointed out a few days ago. He asked just what we had been doing for the past two years.The other 27 countries all have to approve this pathetic deal, and the little we have been offered is slowly being clawed back eg. french disputing British fishing rights, and Spain are kicking up a fuss over Gibralta. If we sign up to this deal we may never fully free of the EU.

Tony Abbot the ex Aussie Primeminister has posted a very good response in the Spectator. Well worth a read, whatever side of the argument you are on.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/tony-abbott-how-to-save-brexit/