Do You Disagree With William Hague's Eight Reasons Why We Should Support

[ladybirder]

Theresa May's Brexit Agreement?

https://premium.telegraph.co.uk/newsletter/article1/eight-eurosceptic-reasons-why-we-should-support-theresa-mays-brexit-agreement/?WT.mc_id=e_DM886533&;WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Edi_New_nReg_VarA&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_Edi_New_nReg_VarA_2018_11_29&;utm_campaign=DM886533

[vetuste_ennemi]

I'm afraid you're relying on the integrity of MPs, Ladybirder. You've already seen the capitulation under pressure or inducement by Give and Fox.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Did I say "Give"? I meant "Take" - no - "Gove".

[vetuste_ennemi]

I'd prefer to see a defence of his position by Gove, actually.

I trusted Gove as an honest politician.

[jim360]

Mock all you like, NJ, but it's still the truth that the UK did have influence inside the EU, and that influence was somewhat directed against further integration. Of course, by nature, one vote in 28 isn't going to get its way if it stands alone, but such is life in a group of equals.

[jim360]

As for the "leave without a deal", I don't get the fanaticism for jumping from one perceived mess into just a different one -- and, frankly, one that is far worse, as it amounts to deliberately creating a vacuum in trade rules and European relations.

It would be the most monumentally stupid act of national self-harm, and it's frankly irresponsible to continue advocating it without a proper and considered evaluation of what it will mean, both in the short-term (when it's an economic shock that will undoubtedly cost many jobs and livelihoods), and the long-term -- when in any case the necessities of an interconnected world largely dictate that we'd have to come to some sort of arrangement with the EU anyway.

[vetuste_ennemi]

The simple-minded man's summary (I invite mockery) is: do you see the EU as a free trade group among sovereign nations, or a political enterprise to create a new state the federal Europe?

[jim360]

Both, presumably -- but, in the end, the second can't happen without the consent of the people, which is clearly not forthcoming.

[vetuste_ennemi]

I understand why young Cambridge-educated physicists might be convinced that a no deal Brexit would be an act of "self-harm". But that's a value judgment rather than opinion based on expertise or evidence.

PS: VE left school at sixteen. So what do I know?

[jim360]

As a further response to NJ's ignorance, consider this article in the Times today, written from the perspective of Ireland and courtesy of Lucinda Creighton, once the Irish Minister of State for European Affairs:

// Some planning has begun in Ireland for the new EU of 27 countries, but there is so much more to do. Without Britain it will be a more challenging place for us. The UK has traditionally been a vocal supporter of tax competition, international free trade, the single market in goods and services and generally the pursuit of business friendly policies. Its absence will be sorely felt by us. //

Similar sentiments among other of the EU nations that aren't France or Germany are not difficult to find. Perhaps, NJ, you should have thought to ask the other EU nations what their opinions were of the UK's role in the EU before you assumed that there was none?

[jim360]

I'm confused why you say it's an opinion "not based on evidence" -- there's clearly plenty, be it the reports by the Bank of England, or the Treasury, or literally every other study on the effects of No Deal out there (apart from those produced by Patrick Minford, but his economic research has been thoroughly discredited).

Isn't that enough evidence to be going on with? And, if not, why not? Would you care to explain what the specific flaws in those studies are?

[vetuste_ennemi]

(I thought the federal project could proceed quite - or largely - unhindered by local "democratic" concerns, given the constitution of the European Commission, its remit and its unaccountability. Ratchet-like? The unelected legislative body proposes and the "parliament" accedes, refers, or denies. It lacks the essential piers of a true parliament: to initiate or to repeal.)

[vetuste_ennemi]

I meant powers rather than piers.

Good Morning, Britain .

[jim360]

Legislation proposed by the Commission still have to be approved by both the EU Parliament and the Council of the EU (CEU), both of which are made up of elected members. The CEU can also propose amendments and the Parliament accept or reject those. I'm not claiming that it's a perfect system but it's not exactly accurate to imply that the Commission can force through the European project unhindered by democratic concerns. As, moreover, its members are appointed by the EU Council (elected heads of state), and must be approved by Parliament, there is at least some level of democratic check on its membership and agenda.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Do you understand the concept of a reverse gear, Jim?

[jim360]

Do you have a point to make?

[vetuste_ennemi]

The Commission v the "parliament"

[vetuste_ennemi]

The elected parliament is not the legislative body. I'm sure you get that, Jim. There are some dishonest people on this site, but you're not one of them.

[Old_Geezer]

It's based on common sense Jim. Even those pushing doom & gloom tend to admit they're worst case scenarios; which by definition have vanishingly small chance of being so.

A less flippant answer would have been to state the obvious, that we tackle issues and cope to achieve our goals.

In any event I don't see "what if" type discussions as more than a distraction for anyone outside of our authorities. One may as well speculate/forecast excess rainbows and unicorns, soaring economics and perfect health for all; and debate what to do if.

Whatever occurs will occur and we'll manage it as it does so as any management must. In any event, other countries manage perfectly well outside the EU, disruption will inevitably be a blip, and once through we'll be our own nation once more.

[Old_Geezer]

I'd be moore foolish wasting time planning for a further referendum that isn't going to happen. We hold them on rare occasions and won't be wasting public money on an issue that we've already made our decision on.

[Old_Geezer]

"jumping from one perceived mess into just a different one"

The challenges of no-deal result in a better status for the nation, once they've been met. The other mess, whether you meant begging the EU to return, or taking up the poisoned challice 'May deal', results in willingly getting trapped in the foreign power block. There's no comparison, the option forced on us is the only valid way forward.