Brexit Penny Dropping?

[woolley]

On 12/18/2023 at 12:49 PM, manxman1980 said:

Would you care to point out anything that has happened post Brexit that could not have happened had the UK still been in the EU that isn't a trade deal?

I mean actually had an impact not some vague notion about sovereignty and taking back control.

It is clear that having decisions taken for you by a committee of 27 others is fine by you. That's all right, but it isn't a principle that I would sign up to. There was plenty that happened during membership that was not in the interests of the UK, but which it had no choice but to go along with and heavily subsidise. The CAP being top of the list.

[manxman1980]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I don’t know whether those plans have yet been enacted into law. These things tend to take time.

Re your second paragraph I would read it as just domestically. The EU have their own rules, but it’s not a big export market for British wine. 
 

 But good news all the same I’m sure you agree.

Unless those plans have got through Parliament then I would not count my chickens...  This Government is increasingly looking like it has lost all touch with reality and does not have that much longer left before an election has to be called (if this Government was an animal it would have been "put down" already to save the suffering).  I therefore cannot see it passing much new legislation.

I would also say that this is hardly the "bonfire of red tape" that Brexit promised nor is it really going to make much difference if it is solely limited to the UK market.  In fact, if these companies want to export to the EU, it will make no difference as they will still need to comply with the EU laws in order to be able to sell into that market.

Finally, is there a huge market for UK wines?  I can't say I can recall ever buying any or seeing much on the shelves.  

46 minutes ago, woolley said:

It is clear that having decisions taken for you by a committee of 27 others is fine by you. That's all right, but it isn't a principle that I would sign up to. There was plenty that happened during membership that was not in the interests of the UK, but which it had no choice but to go along with and heavily subsidise. The CAP being top of the list.

There were also plenty of benefits to the UK including sizeable funding for infrastructure projects throughout the country, especially away from London.  I seem to recall that a lot of the regeneration of Manchester & Liverpool was done on the back of EU funding but I may be wrong as I have not checked.

As for decisions being made for me by a committee of 27 others being fine...  Well, I don't mind as long as I also have a voice and vote in that committee.  The UK certainly had that and as was seen very recently Hungary managed to derail funding to the Ukraine despite all the other members being in favour.  The UK, like other member states, could implement things in their own way and often did so (then blamed the EU if it didn't turn out to be popular).

What Rishi Sunak would give to be in the EU now.  Just think of all the issues he has that he could blame "Brussels" for!

[woolley]

5 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

There were also plenty of benefits to the UK including sizeable funding for infrastructure projects throughout the country, especially away from London.  I seem to recall that a lot of the regeneration of Manchester & Liverpool was done on the back of EU funding but I may be wrong as I have not checked.

As for decisions being made for me by a committee of 27 others being fine...  Well, I don't mind as long as I also have a voice and vote in that committee.  The UK certainly had that and as was seen very recently Hungary managed to derail funding to the Ukraine despite all the other members being in favour.  The UK, like other member states, could implement things in their own way and often did so (then blamed the EU if it didn't turn out to be popular).

What Rishi Sunak would give to be in the EU now.  Just think of all the issues he has that he could blame "Brussels" for!

No such thing as EU funding. At least not in the UK. They took the UK's money and gave a third of it back with strings attached on how it was to be spent. How can a mere "trading bloc" have such power? As I said before, if you think it's fine in principle to have your affairs run in part by 27 others and you have 1 vote against them, then that's your privilege. It's not fine for me though.

As for Hungary throwing its weight around, yes, there are still some matters upon which members retain a veto, although these have been steadily eroded over the years. The mission creep of QMV is ongoing and there is a constant push to enhance the power of the centre against that of the member states. It's an insidious cancer that has no place in a "trading bloc".

https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2022C61/

These are the things that are problematic, NOT free trade.

[The Voice of Reason]

38 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

As for decisions being made for me by a committee of 27 others being fine...  Well, I don't mind as long as I also have a voice and vote in that committee.  

So if this was the Committee of the  “ Society for Mugging Old People (“SMOP” ) you’d be quite happy with that because you have a vote and a voice, amongst 28 on that Committee?

Ok that’s a bit extreme but I’m sure you get the point.

[P.K.]

2 hours ago, woolley said:

Because it was all brushed under the carpet as volumes of EU legislation were foisted upon the statute book.

That's correct. Put on the Statute Book by our own Sovereign Parliament who are the only institution who can make UK law.

If something unpalatable came out of the EU they could have simply voted it down in the HoC.

But in 40+ years it never happened because, no matter what the readers of the Express, Mail, Sun, Telegraph and some on here may think the EU is not run by evil Goblins intent on world domination...

[manxman1980]

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

So if this was the Committee of the  “ Society for Mugging Old People (“SMOP” ) you’d be quite happy with that because you have a vote and a voice, amongst 28 on that Committee?

Ok that’s a bit extreme but I’m sure you get the point.

I would never have joined that society nor agreed to sign up to anything that remotely took it in that direction. 

The UK was perfectly happy to go along with, and support, the development of the EU into what it was at the point the UK left.  Even then the EU Referendum only happened as an attempt by David Cameron to stop the Tory party falling to pieces.  That worked out well for them, didn't it?

[manxman1980]

1 hour ago, woolley said:

No such thing as EU funding. At least not in the UK. They took the UK's money and gave a third of it back with strings attached on how it was to be spent. How can a mere "trading bloc" have such power? As I said before, if you think it's fine in principle to have your affairs run in part by 27 others and you have 1 vote against them, then that's your privilege. It's not fine for me though.

As for Hungary throwing its weight around, yes, there are still some matters upon which members retain a veto, although these have been steadily eroded over the years. The mission creep of QMV is ongoing and there is a constant push to enhance the power of the centre against that of the member states. It's an insidious cancer that has no place in a "trading bloc".

https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2022C61/

These are the things that are problematic, NOT free trade.

The money that was "given back" wasn't exactly forthcoming from the UK Government was it?

The current UK Government only spends money where it thinks it will win votes and not where it us needed.

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

That's correct. Put on the Statute Book by our own Sovereign Parliament who are the only institution who can make UK law.

If something unpalatable came out of the EU they could have simply voted it down in the HoC.

But in 40+ years it never happened because, no matter what the readers of the Express, Mail, Sun, Telegraph and some on here may think the EU is not run by evil Goblins intent on world domination...

What’s your view on the opt outs negotiated by the UK , Ireland and Denmark who didn’t want EU legislation enshrined in domestic law.?

Say in the case of Maastricht the opt out from the Social Chapter?

Yes enshrining workers rights is a good thing but the UK doesn’t need anyone else to do it for them, or for any sort of legislation.

I really wish you would lose this obsession with newspapers. 

[P.K.]

58 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

What’s your view on the opt outs negotiated by the UK , Ireland and Denmark who didn’t want EU legislation enshrined in domestic law.?

Say in the case of Maastricht the opt out from the Social Chapter?

Yes enshrining workers rights is a good thing but the UK doesn’t need anyone else to do it for them, or for any sort of legislation.

I really wish you would lose this obsession with newspapers. 

At the Maastricht Treaty John Major et al could hardly believe their luck. They came away with the best deal in the best trading bloc on the planet!

Now all pissed away by the brexiteers...

[The Voice of Reason]

2 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

I would never have joined that society nor agreed to sign up to anything that remotely took it in that direction. 

The UK was perfectly happy to go along with, and support, the development of the EU into what it was at the point the UK left.  Even then the EU Referendum only happened as an attempt by David Cameron to stop the Tory party falling to pieces.  That worked out well for them, didn't it?

Didn’t work out well for the Tory Party certainly.

But worked out well for the UK populace as a whole though. Which is far more important.

[manxman1980]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Yes enshrining workers rights is a good thing but the UK doesn’t need anyone else to do it for them, or for any sort of legislation

Can I just check what you are saying here. 

Are you suggesting that the UK does not require any form of workers rights to be enshrined in law?  Even by the UK Parliament? 

43 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Didn’t work out well for the Tory Party certainly.

But worked out well for the UK populace as a whole though. Which is far more important.

It certainly didn't play out well for the Tory Party and could well see them obliterated at the next General Election. 

I would argue that last point.  I keep asking for some Brexit benefit that is tangible but don't really get a good answer and certainly not one that can be held up as a benefit to everyone. 

The feel I get is that many people in the UK feel that things have got worse.  I suspect that is because of the mix of Brexit, Covid-19 and a corrupt Government.  Hard to unpick which has had the biggest impact but we know for certain which one has had the longest lasting impact. 

[La Colombe]

57 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

But worked out well for the UK populace as a whole though. Which is far more important.

The UK populace as a whole doesn't agree with you there. However much importance you assign to it. 

[woolley]

6 hours ago, P.K. said:

That's correct. Put on the Statute Book by our own Sovereign Parliament who are the only institution who can make UK law.

If something unpalatable came out of the EU they could have simply voted it down in the  HoC.

But they couldn't. It's that regular memory failure you have, PK. The one about the supremacy of EU Law in the EU.

[woolley]

2 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Can I just check what you are saying here. 

Are you suggesting that the UK does not require any form of workers rights to be enshrined in law?  Even by the UK Parliament? 

It certainly didn't play out well for the Tory Party and could well see them obliterated at the next General Election. 

I would argue that last point.  I keep asking for some Brexit benefit that is tangible but don't really get a good answer and certainly not one that can be held up as a benefit to everyone. 

 

Freedom. The freedom to pass your own laws and chart your own course, rather than that plotted for (and against) you by others. It's the most important thing there is.

This includes the freedom to cock it up, of course, or to make a great success of it. People generally are too dim to appreciate this. The effect on the Tories is neither here nor there. Outsiders should not be dictating any rights of laws whether pertaining to workers or anything else. They are domestic matters.

[manxman1980]

6 hours ago, woolley said:

Freedom. The freedom to pass your own laws and chart your own course, rather than that plotted for (and against) you by others. It's the most important thing there is.

This includes the freedom to cock it up, of course, or to make a great success of it. People generally are too dim to appreciate this. The effect on the Tories is neither here nor there. Outsiders should not be dictating any rights of laws whether pertaining to workers or anything else. They are domestic matters.

So presumably you would then support Scottish,  Welsh, Northern Irish and Manx independence from the UK.

If you believe Freedom is so important how could you possibly deny those nations there own freedom?