Brexit

Our best bits.

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Remain a member of the European Union
222
80%
Leave the European Union
57
20%
 
Total votes: 279
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:32 am

Peter Crisp wrote:While I was a remain voter and continue to think leaving is a terrible idea the way the EU is acting about a member leaving is pretty disgusting. While I realise they have to try and get a worse deal for any country that leaves the level of anger and vindictiveness they are going for seems childish. There seems to be no attempt to just get this done in a sensible manner that benefits everyone.

Maybe I'm being naive in thinking that actions like this with global implications could be done with just the result in mind that neither Europeans living here or UK citizens living in the EU are screwed and that both parties can trade (Yes, ok with new rules I know we can't have the total freedom that EU membership brings) goods as it's mutually beneficial.

The demand that we can't start trade talks with anyone else until we finish this process is also bloody stupid as surely any nation would seek to get good trade deals and the demand just seems pointlessly harsh. They're harming our ability to get trade deals done with other regions just because they can.


That's the rules though isn't it? We signed up to those rules, we are aware of those rules and we were warned that those rules would be followed. We can't now cry that we are a special case that shouldn't be subjected to the rules that we helped write.

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Peter Crisp » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:41 am

Errkal wrote:While you are in the 2 years you are still part of the EU and still subject to rules, also the EU has rules about the ethical and socia aspects of how stuff is made, if you could make deals you could flood the EU with stuff made unethically this impacting the economy.


I have no problem with them saying we can't complete deals before we leave or that they adhere to EU standards (I think we should stick to those same standards after we leave anyway) I'm just saying we should be able to start negotiations.
I know this is massively over simplistic but it's like a woman demanding that you don't start dating again until the divorce is settled even though the relationship is well and truly over and by the way she's going to be banging anything that has a pulse.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
7256930752

PostRe: Brexit
by 7256930752 » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:42 am

@Moggy I agree, it's gooseberry fool for everyone involved but the facts were presented* to voters and a choice was made.

*I know.

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:44 am

Moggy wrote:
Peter Crisp wrote:While I was a remain voter and continue to think leaving is a terrible idea the way the EU is acting about a member leaving is pretty disgusting. While I realise they have to try and get a worse deal for any country that leaves the level of anger and vindictiveness they are going for seems childish. There seems to be no attempt to just get this done in a sensible manner that benefits everyone.

Maybe I'm being naive in thinking that actions like this with global implications could be done with just the result in mind that neither Europeans living here or UK citizens living in the EU are screwed and that both parties can trade (Yes, ok with new rules I know we can't have the total freedom that EU membership brings) goods as it's mutually beneficial.

The demand that we can't start trade talks with anyone else until we finish this process is also bloody stupid as surely any nation would seek to get good trade deals and the demand just seems pointlessly harsh. They're harming our ability to get trade deals done with other regions just because they can.


That's the rules though isn't it? We signed up to those rules, we are aware of those rules and we were warned that those rules would be followed. We can't now cry that we are a special case that shouldn't be subjected to the rules that we helped write.


Are they the rules though? I know the financial payment certainly isn't.

Shoe Army
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:50 am

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Peter Crisp wrote:While I was a remain voter and continue to think leaving is a terrible idea the way the EU is acting about a member leaving is pretty disgusting. While I realise they have to try and get a worse deal for any country that leaves the level of anger and vindictiveness they are going for seems childish. There seems to be no attempt to just get this done in a sensible manner that benefits everyone.

Maybe I'm being naive in thinking that actions like this with global implications could be done with just the result in mind that neither Europeans living here or UK citizens living in the EU are screwed and that both parties can trade (Yes, ok with new rules I know we can't have the total freedom that EU membership brings) goods as it's mutually beneficial.

The demand that we can't start trade talks with anyone else until we finish this process is also bloody stupid as surely any nation would seek to get good trade deals and the demand just seems pointlessly harsh. They're harming our ability to get trade deals done with other regions just because they can.


That's the rules though isn't it? We signed up to those rules, we are aware of those rules and we were warned that those rules would be followed. We can't now cry that we are a special case that shouldn't be subjected to the rules that we helped write.


Are they the rules though? I know the financial payment certainly isn't.


Nobody mentioned the financial payment. That might not be a rule, but it seems fair enough to pay for the things that we have already agreed to pay for. It's also not a rule that the EU have to give the UK any deal at all, it might be best not to run out of the restaurant without paying the bill if we ever want to go for dinner again.

Article 50 in full:

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.


Article 218 in full:

1. Without prejudice to the specific provisions laid down in Article 207, agreements between the Union and third countries or international organisations shall be negotiated and concluded in accordance with the following procedure.

2. The Council shall authorise the opening of negotiations, adopt negotiating directives, authorise the signing of agreements and conclude them.

3. The Commission, or the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy where the agreement envisaged relates exclusively or principally to the common foreign and security policy, shall submit recommendations to the Council, which shall adopt a decision authorising the opening of negotiations and, depending on the subject of the agreement envisaged, nominating the Union negotiator or the head of the Union's negotiating team.

4. The Council may address directives to the negotiator and designate a special committee in consultation with which the negotiations must be conducted.

5. The Council, on a proposal by the negotiator, shall adopt a decision authorising the signing of the agreement and, if necessary, its provisional application before entry into force.

6. The Council, on a proposal by the negotiator, shall adopt a decision concluding the agreement.

Except where agreements relate exclusively to the common foreign and security policy, the Council shall adopt the decision concluding the agreement:

(a) after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament in the following cases:

(i) association agreements;

(ii) agreement on Union accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

(iii) agreements establishing a specific institutional framework by organising cooperation procedures;

(iv) agreements with important budgetary implications for the Union;

(v) agreements covering fields to which either the ordinary legislative procedure applies, or the special legislative procedure where consent by the European Parliament is required.

The European Parliament and the Council may, in an urgent situation, agree upon a time-limit for consent.

(b) after consulting the European Parliament in other cases. The European Parliament shall deliver its opinion within a time-limit which the Council may set depending on the urgency of the matter. In the absence of an opinion within that time-limit, the Council may act.

7. When concluding an agreement, the Council may, by way of derogation from paragraphs 5, 6 and 9, authorise the negotiator to approve on the Union's behalf modifications to the agreement where it provides for them to be adopted by a simplified procedure or by a body set up by the agreement. The Council may attach specific conditions to such authorisation.

8. The Council shall act by a qualified majority throughout the procedure.

However, it shall act unanimously when the agreement covers a field for which unanimity is required for the adoption of a Union act as well as for association agreements and the agreements referred to in Article 212 with the States which are candidates for accession. The Council shall also act unanimously for the agreement on accession of the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; the decision concluding this agreement shall enter into force after it has been approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

9. The Council, on a proposal from the Commission or the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, shall adopt a decision suspending application of an agreement and establishing the positions to be adopted on the Union's behalf in a body set up by an agreement, when that body is called upon to adopt acts having legal effects, with the exception of acts supplementing or amending the institutional framework of the agreement.

10. The European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure.

11. A Member State, the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission may obtain the opinion of the Court of Justice as to whether an agreement envisaged is compatible with the Treaties. Where the opinion of the Court is adverse, the agreement envisaged may not enter into force unless it is amended or the Treaties are revised.

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:56 am

Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Peter Crisp wrote:While I was a remain voter and continue to think leaving is a terrible idea the way the EU is acting about a member leaving is pretty disgusting. While I realise they have to try and get a worse deal for any country that leaves the level of anger and vindictiveness they are going for seems childish. There seems to be no attempt to just get this done in a sensible manner that benefits everyone.

Maybe I'm being naive in thinking that actions like this with global implications could be done with just the result in mind that neither Europeans living here or UK citizens living in the EU are screwed and that both parties can trade (Yes, ok with new rules I know we can't have the total freedom that EU membership brings) goods as it's mutually beneficial.

The demand that we can't start trade talks with anyone else until we finish this process is also bloody stupid as surely any nation would seek to get good trade deals and the demand just seems pointlessly harsh. They're harming our ability to get trade deals done with other regions just because they can.


That's the rules though isn't it? We signed up to those rules, we are aware of those rules and we were warned that those rules would be followed. We can't now cry that we are a special case that shouldn't be subjected to the rules that we helped write.


Are they the rules though? I know the financial payment certainly isn't.


Nobody mentioned the financial payment. That might not be a rule, but it seems fair enough to pay for the things that we have already agreed to pay for. It's also not a rule that the EU have to give the UK any deal at all, it might be best not to run out of the restaurant without paying the bill if we ever want to go for dinner again.

Article 50 in full:

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.


Article 218 in full:

1. Without prejudice to the specific provisions laid down in Article 207, agreements between the Union and third countries or international organisations shall be negotiated and concluded in accordance with the following procedure.

2. The Council shall authorise the opening of negotiations, adopt negotiating directives, authorise the signing of agreements and conclude them.

3. The Commission, or the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy where the agreement envisaged relates exclusively or principally to the common foreign and security policy, shall submit recommendations to the Council, which shall adopt a decision authorising the opening of negotiations and, depending on the subject of the agreement envisaged, nominating the Union negotiator or the head of the Union's negotiating team.

4. The Council may address directives to the negotiator and designate a special committee in consultation with which the negotiations must be conducted.

5. The Council, on a proposal by the negotiator, shall adopt a decision authorising the signing of the agreement and, if necessary, its provisional application before entry into force.

6. The Council, on a proposal by the negotiator, shall adopt a decision concluding the agreement.

Except where agreements relate exclusively to the common foreign and security policy, the Council shall adopt the decision concluding the agreement:

(a) after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament in the following cases:

(i) association agreements;

(ii) agreement on Union accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

(iii) agreements establishing a specific institutional framework by organising cooperation procedures;

(iv) agreements with important budgetary implications for the Union;

(v) agreements covering fields to which either the ordinary legislative procedure applies, or the special legislative procedure where consent by the European Parliament is required.

The European Parliament and the Council may, in an urgent situation, agree upon a time-limit for consent.

(b) after consulting the European Parliament in other cases. The European Parliament shall deliver its opinion within a time-limit which the Council may set depending on the urgency of the matter. In the absence of an opinion within that time-limit, the Council may act.

7. When concluding an agreement, the Council may, by way of derogation from paragraphs 5, 6 and 9, authorise the negotiator to approve on the Union's behalf modifications to the agreement where it provides for them to be adopted by a simplified procedure or by a body set up by the agreement. The Council may attach specific conditions to such authorisation.

8. The Council shall act by a qualified majority throughout the procedure.

However, it shall act unanimously when the agreement covers a field for which unanimity is required for the adoption of a Union act as well as for association agreements and the agreements referred to in Article 212 with the States which are candidates for accession. The Council shall also act unanimously for the agreement on accession of the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; the decision concluding this agreement shall enter into force after it has been approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

9. The Council, on a proposal from the Commission or the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, shall adopt a decision suspending application of an agreement and establishing the positions to be adopted on the Union's behalf in a body set up by an agreement, when that body is called upon to adopt acts having legal effects, with the exception of acts supplementing or amending the institutional framework of the agreement.

10. The European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure.

11. A Member State, the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission may obtain the opinion of the Court of Justice as to whether an agreement envisaged is compatible with the Treaties. Where the opinion of the Court is adverse, the agreement envisaged may not enter into force unless it is amended or the Treaties are revised.


Although you can not pay a restaurant bill if you believe that the service and food was not up to standard.

I don't believe anything will be agreed trade wise in the two years. I'm also sceptical of an interim deal.

Shoe Army
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Peter Crisp » Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:59 am

For an institution like the EU that's so based on the democratic process to deny a country that has voted to leave that right to leave would be pretty much against all it stands for surely?
Then again all I know is this whole process is going to massively suck. I don't envy the people who get stuck arguing over the obscure and really dull issues that will make up 90% of this as yeah it's fun arguing over the fabled £50B exit fee but arguing about the free movement of cows between the UK and Europe is going to be less fun.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:21 am

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Although you can not pay a restaurant bill if you believe that the service and food was not up to standard.


Yes but you would look a massive wanker if you refused to pay knowing exactly what the service in the restaurant was like before hand, you received the exact dish you requested and still wanted to eat there every week afterwards.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:23 am

Peter Crisp wrote:For an institution like the EU that's so based on the democratic process to deny a country that has voted to leave that right to leave would be pretty much against all it stands for surely?


Who has denied anybody the right to leave?

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:23 am

Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Although you can not pay a restaurant bill if you believe that the service and food was not up to standard.


Yes but you would look a massive wanker if you refused to pay knowing exactly what the service in the restaurant was like before hand, you received the exact dish you requested and still wanted to eat there every week afterwards.


That's a good description of certain members of the travelling community.

Shoe Army
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Peter Crisp » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:37 am

Moggy wrote: It's also not a rule that the EU have to give the UK any deal at all.


Sorry for quote snipping but I felt that this was you arguing that they didn't need to let us leave but if that wasn't your intention then sorry about that.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Knoyleo » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:39 am

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Although you can not pay a restaurant bill if you believe that the service and food was not up to standard.


Yes but you would look a massive wanker if you refused to pay knowing exactly what the service in the restaurant was like before hand, you received the exact dish you requested and still wanted to eat there every week afterwards.


That's a good description of certain members of the travelling community.

What the strawberry float? :dread: :lol: :fp:

pjbetman wrote:That's the stupidest thing ive ever read on here i think.
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:42 am

Peter Crisp wrote:
Moggy wrote: It's also not a rule that the EU have to give the UK any deal at all.


Sorry for quote snipping but I felt that this was you arguing that they didn't need to let us leave but if that wasn't your intention then sorry about that.


What I meant was they do not have to give us any deal. They can just let us drop to WTO rules without any other trade agreements in place.

That is not the same thing as "letting us go". We will be leaving in 2 years whatever happens now - other than the possible exception of both sides agreeing to an extension of the 2 years.

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:59 am

Knoyleo wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Although you can not pay a restaurant bill if you believe that the service and food was not up to standard.


Yes but you would look a massive wanker if you refused to pay knowing exactly what the service in the restaurant was like before hand, you received the exact dish you requested and still wanted to eat there every week afterwards.


That's a good description of certain members of the travelling community.

What the strawberry float? :dread: :lol: :fp:


Have you never worked or sat in a restaurant and seen this happen. It's a weekly occurrence in some places.

Anyway we are off topic now so Europe and stuff. I quite like the EU flag it's nice.

Last edited by Return_of_the_STAR on Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Shoe Army
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Lex-Man » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:01 pm

I've seen it happen with a lot of different people. Walk outs in restaurants are incredibly common.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:10 pm

lex-man wrote:I've seen it happen with a lot of different people. Walk outs in restaurants are incredibly common.


A disproportionate amount are from the travelling community.

Shoe Army
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Hexx » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:11 pm

France joining Germany to say talks will be sequential, with exit process compelted first, not concurrent as the UK wants/demands.

Going well so far

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:14 pm

Hexx wrote:France joining Germany to say talks will be sequential, with exit process compelted first, not concurrent as the UK wants/demands.

Going well so far


Yeah I think the exit talks will take all of the two years, that's if they are even completed in the two years. Especially if they want us to pay an exit fee.

Shoe Army
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Lex-Man » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:17 pm

Hexx wrote:France joining Germany to say talks will be sequential, with exit process compelted first, not concurrent as the UK wants/demands.

Going well so far


The UK government must have known that this would happen, surely.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Errkal
Member
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Errkal » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:19 pm

lex-man wrote:
Hexx wrote:France joining Germany to say talks will be sequential, with exit process compelted first, not concurrent as the UK wants/demands.

Going well so far


The UK government must have known that this would happen, surely.


They will have done, but they are not interested on what can actually be done, only that they keep the UKIP "leave" "leave" "leave" on side at all costs. so failed to mention it.


Return to “Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 144 guests