QuakerPete wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 26, 2019 1:34 am
Nope, I’ve said that the WA and Trade Deal are linked - the EU say they are linked, not independent of each other.
The trade deal will not follow a No Deal as though somehow the EU will just waive the terms of the WA. The EU have consistently said that the 3 outstanding elements of the Withdrawal Agreement will still need to be settled before any trade deal is discussed, namely:
1. The balance of any monies outstanding from the £39b specified in the WA
2. Citizens Rights in the respective countries
3. The Northern Ireland Backstop
They are not going to proceed on trade before these issues are resolved satisfactorily, hence the links between the 2 elements.
The promise of “a Great Deal” stands and the mandate of No Deal is non-existent as it was not discussed or promoted until late 2018.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 1.html?amp
1. EU playing hard-ball: OK in your book. UK playing hard-ball: not OK in your book. Can you not see what the EU are doing? They're threatening to walk away if we don't give them what they want. That's EXACTLY what Boris et al have been trying to do but they keep getting hamstrung by people who simply refuse to accept the 2016 result. So we end up in a catch-22 situation where we want a good deal, but we can't get a good deal because to get a good deal, we need to be genuinely willing to walk away with no deal (which Theresa May never was), but because certain people won't accept no deal (or even leaving at all), WE WILL NEVER GET A GOOD DEAL. Then they have the gall to turn around and say "look how bad this deal is, don't you really want to remain now? We told you it would be a bad deal. See, look, we told you", whilst at the same time hiding their blood-stained hands behind their backs.
This alone should be argument enough, why can you not see what's staring you right in the face?
2. Again, you're conflating issues. What was discussed during the referendum was a trade deal, not a withdrawal agreement. Hence any "promises" (as you put it) made were with regards to a trade deal. You therefore can't call these claims false until we've at least concluded the trade negotiations and fully left the EU. And of course the EU would say they won't negotiate any trade deal before those issues have been resolved: that's called clever negotiation tactics. If only we had a similar ace up our sleeves... Oh wait, we do.
3. There was more to the Leave vote than economics, and more to the economics than a deal with the EU. If the EU was nothing more than a trading bloc then this would be a different debate altogether.
4. The possibility of no deal (trade or otherwise) was public knowledge during the referendum, and WAS mentioned (I've already provided evidence). Also, if No Deal is on the table, which it must be to get a good deal, then it's always a possibility. Your claim that somehow people didn't know about or understand it is a rehash of "Leave voters didn't know what they voted for/were too thick to fully understand/were brainwashed into voting a certain way". But it's nothing more than guesswork. We voted to Leave, that's it. The information was there, so to claim one side or the other didn't have all the information is, as I said, guesswork. You could quite as easily say the same about Remain and all their Project Fear nonsense (being at the back of the queue in a deal with the US, anyone?)
Leave won the referendum in 2016, Theresa May was then voted in under the premise of "no deal is better than a bad deal", and the Brexit Party won considerably more MEP seats than any other party in the EU elections. Don't try and tell me people didn't know what they were voting for when that's 3 times (4 if you include David Cameron's initial promise of a referendum) that people have voted in favour of Brexit.
I love as well how Remainers say things like "well if you just change this, and change that, and throw that in, then wow, as if by magic, Leave didn't really win in 2016 afterall! How did that happen?"
5. Extending to stop No Deal was not mandated either, yet a general election is being refused until an extension is forced through, so you can shut your trap about bloody mandates, especially when what WAS mandated is to leave the EU.
The PM offered to hold a general election but no, democracy is only important when it suits your agenda.