EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[anme]

How can anyone claim that a vote to leave the European Union is a vote leave the single market, when a number of countries are members of the single market but not members of the European Union? Ditto for freedom of movement?

 

[burneside]

You've made my job more difficult by failing to attribute or source any of the quotes you gave.

Nevertheless, the first quote is from Daniel Hannan. He refers to the tariff-free goods trading arrangements which take in countries such as Iceland (EFTA/EEA), Switzerland (EFTA/non-EEA), Montenegro/Serbia/Albania/Bosnia/etc (neither), Turkey (customs union only). He is providing the view that, as an MEP, he has not heard any other EU countries expressing the view that they wish to impose tariffs on British goods. (I still haven't heard this desire expressed, although there is obviously the 'four freedoms' negotiation position being set out). Hannan is one of the leading proponents of the idea that we should reject standards harmonisation in favour of mutual recognition and seek trade deals with the rest of the world.

The second quote is from Owen Paterson. You have disingenuously cut out the rest of the paragraph where he makes clear that he is talking about the 'market' as in the economic marketplace only and that he favours a trading arrangement:

"Only a madman would actually leave the market. It is not the EU (which is a political organisation) delivering the prosperity and buying our goods, it's the members of the market, and we'll carry on trading with the market. I mean, are we actually really suggesting that the fifth largest economy in the world is not going to come to a satisfactory trading arrangement with the EU?"

The last two quotes are from Nigel Farage and Arron Banks respectively, who have nothing to do with the official leave campaign and, like any private individual, are entitled to express their views.

On the Sunday Politics show just a week ago Andrew Neil ripped apart Open Britain's James McGrory for making exactly the same deception (and a lot of others). Are these Remoaners so dense that they think people cannot see through their lies and distortions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How can anyone claim that a vote to leave the European Union is a vote leave the single market, when a number of countries are members of the single market but not members of the European Union? Ditto for freedom of movement?

When I cast my leave vote it was for exactly that; lock, stock and barrel. No more payments to Brussels, and if that means leaving the single market and stopping FoM then so be it.

 

[Barn]

How can anyone claim that a vote to leave the European Union is a vote leave the single market, when a number of countries are members of the single market but not members of the European Union? Ditto for freedom of movement?

Lots of people now talk of being 'in' the single market, or "members" of the single market, or of 'leaving' the single market. This is confused.

The single market is the EU, and the EU is the single market. It comprises EU treaty principles, ECJ jurisdiction and jurisprudence, Commission law-making and standards-setting, etc. The single market is not a separate institution to be a member of or to leave.

There are various means by which non-EU countries can access the single market.

One of those is the EEA, which provides for harmonisation of laws and standards but still does not provide for oversight by the EU's institutions. (Non-EU EEA members are supervised by the EFTA Surveillance Authority and subject to the EFTA Court). Its members are not therefore 'in' the single market, but they have almost unlimited access to it.

Another is Swiss-style sectoral treaties.

Another is a Canada-style comprehensive FTA.

Another is a Turkey-style goods customs deal.

Another is through WTO most favoured nation arrangements.

We need to come out of the EU (because that is what people voted for) and then decide the terms on which we will trade with the EU. This is a separate process and my opinion is that parliament should have the right to approve that deal. But it is a separate task to that of leaving the EU.

 

[AlterEgo]

When I cast my leave vote it was for exactly that; lock, stock and barrel. No more payments to Brussels, and if that means leaving the single market and stopping FoM then so be it.

You were voting for something that wasn't on the referendum paper then.

 

[burneside]

You were voting for something that wasn't on the referendum paper then.

Neither was staying in the single market and sending billions to Brussels.

 

[EM2]

When I cast my leave vote it was for exactly that; lock, stock and barrel. No more payments to Brussels, and if that means leaving the single market and stopping FoM then so be it.

You were voting for something that wasn't on the referendum paper then.

I'd say that that was exactly what was on the referendum paper. I fully expected that if Leave won, that's exactly what they would want. No more of anything that ties the UK to the EU, and send us back to 1970.

 

[ainsworth74]

Neither was staying in the single market and sending billions to Brussels.

The only thing on the paper was either to remain within the EU or leave. Nothing else. There were no questions on what format that leaving (or remaining for that matter) should look like. Simply that the UK either continue to be a member of the European Union or left the European Union.

 

[Barn]

The only thing on the paper was either to remain within the EU or leave. Nothing else. There were no questions on what format that leaving (or remaining for that matter) should look like. Simply that the UK either continue to be a member of the European Union or left the European Union.

Agreed, but the default, natural meaning of those words must mean leaving the EU.

Any further relationship with the EU must be through us as a sovereign nation reaching an agreement with the EU.

One cannot read a vote to "leave the EU" as "leave bits of the EU but remain subject to other bits as some sort of semi-member".

 

[Steveman]

We never agreed to leave the eea! A tiny majority said we should not be a member of the European Union. That's all. As leave campaigners said

"Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market"

A tiny majority you say, will you ever get over it, you and all your anti-democratic chums (when it suits you) will be in A&E soon the way you're going.
Do you know what a tiny majority is ? it's a majority and although you have said you don't believe in majorities (when it suits you) that's the way it is.
You lost and you simply won't accept it because you don't think it's right.
There are a lot of things I don't think are right but life doesn't always go the way you want.

 

[AM9]

... One cannot read a vote to "leave the EU" as "leave bits of the EU but remain subject to other bits as some sort of semi-member".

I strongly suspect that the majority of the leave voters for whom immigration wasn't to blame for everything that is wrong in the UK, that leaving the EEA as described as a 'Norway' in the leaver propaganda wasn't what was deciding their vote. Not all those who expressed dissatisfaction with the EU wanted to give everything away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

... There are a lot of things I don't think are right but life doesn't always go the way you want.

I think you are right there. There are still plenty of legal flaws in the Government's rush to 'get beyond the point of no return' that can be exploited.
The process of law has infinite patience, unlike the electorate's support for politicians.

 

[EM2]

There are a lot of things I don't think are right but life doesn't always go the way you want.

So you don't bother arguing against them?

 

[Barn]

I strongly suspect that the majority of the leave voters for whom immigration wasn't to blame for everything that is wrong in the UK, that leaving the EEA as described as a 'Norway' in the leaver propaganda wasn't what was deciding their vote. Not all those who expressed dissatisfaction with the EU wanted to give everything away.
.

The EEA is a terrible, irrational solution. For people who care about immigration it preserves freedom of movement. For people who care about sovereignty it includes a requirement to accept much EU legislation. For people who wish to remain it loses our council and parliament seats. Nobody could feasibly have been aiming for EEA when they voted.

 

[Steveman]

So you don't bother arguing against them?

Arguing is one thing, incessant bleating and crying day in day out non-stop since June is very immature behaviour.
We know you want the decision reversed we hear it every day, it's just getting rather repetitive.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3978662/European-president-Jean-Claude-Juncker-pleads-EU-leaders-not-hold-referendums-voters-choose-LEAVE.html

Jean-Claude Juncker has urged EU leaders not to hold referendums on their membership of the bloc because he fears their voters will also choose to leave.

The European Commission president said giving people a vote would be 'unwise' as they could seek to replicate Brexit.

Spot on - never give the people a say as basically they're all idiot racists.
The dominos will not be stopped whatever this pathetic drunk thinks.

 

[anme]

The EEA is a terrible, irrational solution. For people who care about immigration it preserves freedom of movement. For people who care about sovereignty it includes a requirement to accept much EU legislation. For people who wish to remain it loses our council and parliament seats. Nobody could feasibly have been aiming for EEA when they voted.

I think you're crediting a lot of people with a lot more thought than is justified by the evidence.

I agree the EEA is a terrible solution that only an absolute moron would prefer to EU membership, but it's now better than any other option open to the UK (apart from staying in the EU).

 

[AM9]

The EEA is a terrible, irrational solution. For people who care about immigration it preserves freedom of movement. For people who care about sovereignty it includes a requirement to accept much EU legislation. For people who wish to remain it loses our council and parliament seats. Nobody could feasibly have been aiming for EEA when they voted.

I don't think anybody here knows what the leavers thought they were voting for, but there are plenty trying to claim that their personal cocktail of post referendum measures are those of the 52% of voters.
Those who voted in favour of remaining in the EU know exactly what they were voting for because they had experienced it for some time. Of all the major types of outcome, (remain in, 'Norway', 'Canada' or WTC - or any other leaver sub-division) the remain in option would seem to be in a majority of possible real-world futures given the disparate collection of brexit versions being continually espoused.
The brexit side has a real problem. They cannot define what the vote was for because the promoters thought that they were being smart by not specifying what was on offer. Also, they hadn't seriously looked at the legal situation that a leave vote would create, nor considered how a government tasked with implementing an such an ill-defined strategy could proceed within the legal framework that our relationship with both the EU and the rest of the world operates under.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think you're crediting a lot of people with a lot more thought than is justified by the evidence.

I agree the EEA is a terrible solution that only an absolute moron would prefer to EU membership, but it's now better than any other option open to the UK (apart from staying in the EU).

... which is still an option as long as nobody tries to break the law and activate Article 50.

 

[anme]

Lots of people now talk of being 'in' the single market, or "members" of the single market, or of 'leaving' the single market. This is confused.

The single market is the EU, and the EU is the single market. It comprises EU treaty principles, ECJ jurisdiction and jurisprudence, Commission law-making and standards-setting, etc. The single market is not a separate institution to be a member of or to leave.

There are various means by which non-EU countries can access the single market.

One of those is the EEA, which provides for harmonisation of laws and standards but still does not provide for oversight by the EU's institutions. (Non-EU EEA members are supervised by the EFTA Surveillance Authority and subject to the EFTA Court). Its members are not therefore 'in' the single market, but they have almost unlimited access to it.

Another is Swiss-style sectoral treaties.

Another is a Canada-style comprehensive FTA.

Another is a Turkey-style goods customs deal.

Another is through WTO most favoured nation arrangements.

We need to come out of the EU (because that is what people voted for) and then decide the terms on which we will trade with the EU. This is a separate process and my opinion is that parliament should have the right to approve that deal. But it is a separate task to that of leaving the EU.

No. The EEA is the single market by any vaguely practical definition. The UK *is* an EEA member. Compared to being a member of the EU and the EEA, there are some differences in detail for countries that are only EEA members (e.g. oversight by the EFTA court rather than the ECJ) but in practice, they are very small in terms of a country's legal obligations in taking part in the single market.

The main difference is that the EEA-only member states have on say in the creation of the single market-related directives that they have to implement.

 

[Steveman]

I think you're crediting a lot of people with a lot more thought than is justified by the evidence.

We know we're all idiots - no need to keep repeating it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Those who voted in favour of remaining in the EU know exactly what they were voting for because they had experienced it for some time.

It never ends does it.

 

[Howardh]

I must admit that I didn't know we were already members of the EEA; but as we are then that should also have been on the referendum - do you want to remain in (both), or leave the EEA and EU, just to be clear. Maybe a third option of leaving but remaining in the EEA (single market).

Just shows what a total mess the referendum was, and now I'd be perfectly happy to be in the EEA - remainers would still get their four freedoms and leavers would get what they wanted, out of the EU. 100% happy happies!

But I have a feeling that leavers want us out of EVERYTHING (except the CTA - which would give us problems later on) except none of that was on the referendum!

perhaps we should scrap the result and start from scratch, and list all the likely outcomes and get us to vote, maybe multi-vote, before we kick off Article 50 (if we ever do).

 

[Johnuk123]

A tiny majority you say, will you ever get over it, you and all your anti-democratic chums (when it suits you) will be in A&E soon the way you're going.
Do you know what a tiny majority is ? it's a majority and although you have said you don't believe in majorities (when it suits you) that's the way it is.
You lost and you simply won't accept it because you don't think it's right.
There are a lot of things I don't think are right but life doesn't always go the way you want.

Dead right, we could have a million votes but until the Remainers win they will never ever accept it as they simply won't believe that everybody doesn't think like them because they're ignorant.

 

[Railops]

Leave campaigners explicitly said the referendum was not about the EEA, and that we would remain a member of the EEA. No legal trickery there, just more leave lies.

Talking about lies - did I miss the immediate profound economic shock that your lot made such a big thing of.

 

[Johnuk123]

Don't forget Osborne's prediction that the redundancies will start the day after Brexit and the stock market may well have to be immediately suspended.
And I thought it was only Leave that told porkies at least that's what the BBC and the Guardian told us but then they aren't very reliable when it comes to the truth.

 

[AlterEgo]

Talking about lies - did I miss the immediate profound economic shock that your lot made such a big thing of.

If there are to be victims of Brexit, they'll largely be confined to the demographic that voted for it. So I wouldn't be too ebullient if I were you.

 

[Steveman]

If there are to be victims of Brexit, they'll largely be confined to the demographic that voted for it. So I wouldn't be too ebullient if I were you.

All the northern idiot racists then not the Metropolitan elite that have been sulking since June, they'll be laughing.
Since when was it an IF, Osborne never said it was an IF what's changed ?

 

[AlterEgo]

All the northern idiot racists then not the Metropolitan elite that have been sulking since June, they'll be laughing.

It's very unfortunate people have framed Brexiteers as racists. I was rather on about the lower-income, lower-education level demographic - the precariat, if you want a liberal term.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Since when was it an IF, Osborne never said it was an IF what's changed ?

I think it is likely there will be economic slowdown, and we all know who suffers first when that happens. I don't claim to be an oracle however.

 

[Steveman]

It's very unfortunate people have framed Brexiteers as racists. I was rather on about the lower-income, lower-education level demographic - the precariat, if you want a liberal term.

Just call them stupid and thick no need for the flowery language.

 

[EM2]

Talking about lies - did I miss the immediate profound economic shock that your lot made such a big thing of.

You've seen the state of the pound against the Euro?

Don't forget Osborne's prediction that the redundancies will start the day after Brexit and the stock market may well have to be immediately suspended.

I personally know two people that were made redundant in the week after the result, and the company concerned stated that it was directly because of the vote.

 

[AlterEgo]

Just call them stupid and thick no need for the flowery language.

Just because people aren't educated doesn't mean they're thick.

 

[EM2]

Arguing is one thing, incessant bleating and crying day in day out non-stop since June is very immature behaviour.
We know you want the decision reversed we hear it every day, it's just getting rather repetitive.

I don't want it reversed, you've made the bed and now we all have to lie in it. It's going to be utter chaos and the deficit is going to be massive, but hey, it's what you wanted.

 

[Johnuk123]

I personally know two people that were made redundant in the week after the result, and the company concerned stated that it was directly because of the vote.

Not really what Osborne predicted is it.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's very unfortunate people have framed Brexiteers as racists. I was rather on about the lower-income, lower-education level demographic - the precariat, if you want a liberal term.

Would this class have been the Plebians in Ancient Rome?