Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Buster15 said:
Couple of points.
We did not join the EC. We joined the Common Market.

Who are 'they' who blame everyone.
It is perfectly clear to me that judging by the comments here, we are blaming our politicians for the undoubted mess.
Click to expand...

They changed it from EC to EEC to make it more sellable but when I voted in 75 it wasn't so that British Leyland could sell their cars more easily to France.
I remember the same arguments back then.

I meant the Brexiters are blaming the EU for not solving the problems they caused.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I find it terribly sad and equally annoying when they try to blame everyone except themselves.
Click to expand...

We insist on shooting ourselves in the head and it is Europe's fault that they don't stop the bullet from doing any harm.

We all know that without the EU shooting yourself in the head is by far the best plan.

They really don't want us to shoot ourselves in the head at all and are trying their best to mitigate the damage if we insist. Fecking EU. It is all their fault.
 
Grayling the is the worst cabinet minister in my lifetime. You can't make him up.
 
Hammerfell said:
I’m bored of this, I’m going for a Twix.
Click to expand...

I had one earlier and I was enjoying it fully until I realised we import it from Holland. My eyes watered reading that info on the packet :(

feck jobs what are we going to do about Twix!!!
 
Ultimate Grib said:
I had one earlier and I was enjoying it fully until I realised we import it from Holland. My eyes watered reading that info on the packet :(

feck jobs what are we going to do about Twix!!!
Click to expand...

It's a twix in name, but not really the same quality it was 15 odd years back. A lot of the old British chocolate products have dropped in quality (choc content and product size), while production has shifted to the continent.

I imagine that we will see a lot of these products replaced in our shopping baskets in the upcoming years*. Chocolate production is having a revival in the UK**, with a focus on craft and quality. Any daft stuff of whacking up tarrifs would likely accelerate it further

* bit like how the bog standard largers and bitters have lost market share for Real Ale and Craft Beer

** didn't actually realise that twix was a UK product
 
Last edited:
Bola said:
It's a twix in name, but not really the same quality it was 15 odd years back. A lot of the old British chocolate products have dropped in quality (choc content and product size), with production shifted to the continent.

I imagine that we will see a lot of these products replaced in our shopping baskets in the upcoming years*. Chocolate production is having a revival in the UK**, with a focus on craft and quality. Any daft stuff of whacking up tarrifs would likely accelerate it further

* bit like how the bog standard largers and bitters have lost market share for Real Ale and Craft Beer

** didn't actually realise that twix was a UK product
Click to expand...

Sure what would “the continent” know about making good quality food anyway?!?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Sure what would “the continent” know about making good quality food anyway?!?
Click to expand...

Who Is saying the 'continent' don't know how to make quality food.

From my recollection, the chocolate content of the bigger brands has been steadily dropping over recent years. Don't think that necessarily relates to where it was made, just a shift in how some of the big businesses now approach this market
 
Yes let's mock the views of working class people from 40 years ago. Easy.

There'd be a French, German, Spanish equivalent to be posted but that wouldn't suit your narrative.
 
Bola said:
Who Is saying the 'continent' don't know how to make quality food.

From my recollection, the chocolate content of the bigger brands has been steadily dropping over recent years. Don't think that necessarily relates to where it was made, just a shift in how some of the big businesses now approach this market
Click to expand...

Well, exactly.

But it’s interesting that your first instinct was to blame lowering manufacturing standards on production shifting to mainland Europe. That’s the sort of unsubstantiated eurosceptism Boris Johnson has made a career out of.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Well, exactly.

But it’s interesting that your first instinct was to blame lowering manufacturing standards on production shifting to mainland Europe. That’s the sort of unsubstantiated eurosceptism Boris Johnson has made a career out of.
Click to expand...

I didn't. Although looking back at that sentence structure (edited now to be clearer), I can see how it could have been interpreted that way
 
Bola said:
I didn't. Although looking back at that sentence structure (edited now to be clearer), I can see how it could have been interpreted that way
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough. Apologies if I misinterpreted what you’re saying. Although there’s also an irony in you mentioning chocolate as a foodstuff which can shift to more localised production after Brexit, considering its one of not many types of food that’s impossible to manufacture without importing ingredients from overseas. Often via shipping lines that use mainland European ports.
 
Bola said:
Very informative on point 2. The GFA/ NI Sovereignty issue is very difficult dilemma to solve - I really don't have an answer yet on what i would chose if it was one vs the other. I don't want it to get to that situation, so my preference is to have a temp agreement (broadly the status quo) to give everyone time to solve it. I refuse to believe that something so important is beyond a reasonable compromise, as long as there is the right political will
Click to expand...

Well that was basically what the withdrawal agreement and backstop were designed to enable, but you can't put a time limit on it. It's needed until it isn't, it's as simple as that. No one can guarantee a solution will be found within a certain timeframe.

On the 1st point, some of the earlier proposals I read is that exiting the backstop is ultimately an EU decision. The onus on the UK coming up with something that the EU feels is acceptable, is no substitute for a sovereign decision and effectively leaves the UK trapped. That is not acceptable, hence my preference for a fixed term period to sort this mess out
Click to expand...

Well i'm not 100% certain it would be the EU's decision as i've said i think the UK would be in control as soon as they found a solution. And i don't necessarily agree with the idea that the UK would be 'trapped'. But lets say that was the case, the UK (specifically Northern Ireland) wouldn't be trapped by the backstop it would be trapped by the Good Friday Agreement. And this is the big sticking point thats thrown a spanner into the gears of Brexit.

The British government agreed to uphold the GFA no one forced them to. They have a responsibility to it and the people of Northern Ireland. Lets also remember that the EU proposed that only NI stay within the CU/SM and the majority of people here in NI would have been more than happy with that arrangement. That would have enabled Britain to leave the EU/CU/SM unhindered.

You say you prefer a fixed term period to sort it out. But what happens if at the end of this fixed period there is still no solution found to the border issue? Does the British government just go ''Oh well we gave it a jolly good try chaps.'' and then rip up the GFA and break international law?

What was your earlier question that you asked pleased? I may have overlooked it as I was getting 5 alerts at a time earlier when opening up Red Caf. I'll try my best to answer it
Click to expand...

No worries it was basically asking how you thought the UK could leave the EU and still preserve the GFA. But you basically answered it with this post.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Ok, fair enough. Apologies if I misinterpreted what you’re saying. Although there’s also an irony in you mentioning chocolate as a foodstuff which can shift to more localised production after Brexit, considering its one of not many types of food that’s impossible to manufacture without importing ingredients from overseas. Often via shipping lines that use mainland European ports.
Click to expand...

No worries, no need to apologise.

Just to clarify, the local production is already happening, but could be sped up under certain Brexit conditions.

Interesting topic you raise on raw inputs (components), although chocolate is a relatively simple product, it is still reliant on a globalised supply chain. The world economy is increasingly interdependent and I'd find it an interesting read to see how many products can be feasibly sourced and produce in a single country (or regional collections of countries)

As a slight aside on interdependence, it gets scary when i realised how key raw materials in concentrated in such limited geographical locations. This ranges from a 'traditional' essential of phosphate (fertiliser) being heavily concentrated in Morocco, through to a range of rare earth elements (high end tech products) located in the relatively unstable parts of Africa. A long term disruption to supply and the world would be screwed
 
stevoc said:
Well that was basically what the withdrawal agreement and backstop were designed to enable, but you can't put a time limit on it. It's needed until it isn't, it's as simple as that. No one can guarantee a solution will be found within a certain timeframe.



Well i'm not 100% certain it would be the EU's decision as i've said i think the UK would be in control as soon as they found a solution. And i don't necessarily agree with the idea that the UK would be 'trapped'. But lets say that was the case, the UK (specifically Northern Ireland) wouldn't be trapped by the backstop it would be trapped by the Good Friday Agreement. And this is the big sticking point thats thrown a spanner into the gears of Brexit.

The British government agreed to uphold the GFA no one forced them to. They have a responsibility to it and the people of Northern Ireland. Lets also remember that the EU proposed that only NI stay within the CU/SM and the majority of people here in NI would have been more than happy with that arrangement. That would have enabled Britain to leave the EU/CU/SM unhindered.

You say you prefer a fixed term period to sort it out. But what happens if at the end of this fixed period there is still no solution found to the border issue? Does the British government just go ''Oh well we gave it a jolly good try chaps.'' and then rip up the GFA and break international law?



No worries it was basically asking how you thought the UK could leave the EU and still preserve the GFA. But you basically answered it with this post.
Click to expand...

The reporting hasn't been particularly great on the implications of the deal, but the following article perhaps better articulates some of my 'trapped' concerns around the backstop

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...irish-border-guarantee-may-deal-a8678306.html

Re the time limit, it was mainly to avoid a cliff edge this year that could have significant consequences. You are right that we could be in the same position 2/3 years down the line and a tough decision would still need to be made. But my hope is that it buys time for a sensible solution to gain consensus by all involved. Personally, I think it would be a different negotiating scenario, with greater engagement in the UK, while there is greater assertiveness but less adversarial relations with the EU in negotiating - tjrtevis growing Brexit fatigue and basic level, most people want it sorted amicably
 
Bola said:
The reporting hasn't been particularly great on the implications of the deal, but the following article perhaps better articulates some of my 'trapped' concerns around the backstop

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...irish-border-guarantee-may-deal-a8678306.html

Re the time limit, it was mainly to avoid a cliff edge this year that could have significant consequences. You are right that we could be in the same position 2/3 years down the line and a tough decision would still need to be made. But my hope is that it buys time for a sensible solution to gain consensus by all involved. Personally, I think it would be a different negotiating scenario, with greater engagement in the UK, while there is greater assertiveness but less adversarial relations with the EU in negotiating - tjrtevis growing Brexit fatigue and basic level, most people want it sorted amicably
Click to expand...

That article does give a bit more insight on it thanks, the part about the UK and EU having to agree to the backstop is interesting. But unless someone subscribes to the theory that the EU would not act in good faith and agree to end the backstop once a viable solution is found then i don't see the problem there.

I can understand people have some concerns but it boils down to semantics doesn't it. Regardless of who does or doesn't have the control to end the backstop. The backstop if it's ever needed has been designed primarily for the purpose protecting the Good Friday Agreement. It will only be needed as long as it's needed, if theres no solution to replace it why would the UK ever want the option to end it?

Ending the backstop would effectively be ending the GFA.

You are right that we could be in the same position 2/3 years down the line and a tough decision would still need to be made. But my hope is that it buys time for a sensible solution to gain consensus by all involved.
Click to expand...

With respect mate to most of the people in Northern Ireland that sort of deal would just not be good enough, hope isn't enough the backstop offers a guarantee to maintain the GFA and the peace that came with it.

And the tough decision i am assuming is whether or not the UK decides to completely withdraw from the CU/SM and break the GFA if no solution is found in 2-3 years?

I can safely say 2-3 years won't be long enough to solve the border issue, during the last 2-3 years no solution was found. I don't have a clue how long it would take, it could be 5/10/20/?? years. No one knows which is why the backstop is needed.
 
British chocolate may be better than the stuff the yanks get, but that's not because the manufacturers in the UK are fighting to keep it that way.

The Spanish famously wanted to officially label British chocolate as "chocolate substitute" because it contains some vegetable fats rather than only cocoa butter.

If anything, it's the EU who are the ones maintaining chocolate standards in the UK. Manufacturers of British chocolate have been trying to shift towards US style chocolate for ages in order to reduce costs and increase conformity across markets.

Also, the UK and Ireland have already been allowed an exception by the EU courts to produce 'milk chocolate' with only 20% cocoa solids compared to a minimum of 25% on the continent. That's why in Europe, products like Cadbury's Dairy Milk have to be labelled as "family milk chocolate" so as to differentiate themselves from the higher quality local milk chocolates.

So, if anything, it's the UK who are responsible for worsening our own chocolate and the EU are the ones trying to stop us.

And whilst it's true that portion sizes are getting smaller, that's not because of anything Europe are doing. It's down to the fact that cocoa is getting more expensive due to increased demand from places like China. If portion sizes are an issue, nobody is stopping consumers from buying two bars and paying for the privelege.
 
Maybe was posted here before back in the day. But this is how i looked a german supermarket when one day they decided to eliminate their foreign products from the shelves to show how interdependent is on foreign markets regarding pricing and product diversity. That would happen as well in a UK supermarket if they would do the same initiative.

Of course Brexit would not cause this image, but that image shows how many products would be affected on pricing and supply chain as not only EU products would be affected but also all the products that comes from countries that the EU has trade agreements that UK will not have anymore if there is no deal

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-racism-diversity-largest-chain-a7908551.html

417019_90ddd1d4bf1748f280195e76ca7c788f.jpg
 
Dante said:
British chocolate may be better than the stuff the yanks get, but that's not because the manufacturers in the UK are fighting to keep it that way.

The Spanish famously wanted to officially label British chocolate as "chocolate substitute" because it contains some vegetable fats rather than only cocoa butter.

If anything, it's the EU who are the ones maintaining chocolate standards in the UK. Manufacturers of British chocolate have been trying to shift towards US style chocolate for ages in order to reduce costs and increase conformity across markets.

Also, the UK and Ireland have already been allowed an exception by the EU courts to produce 'milk chocolate' with only 20% cocoa solids compared to a minimum of 25% on the continent. That's why in Europe, products like Cadbury's Dairy Milk have to be labelled as "family milk chocolate" so as to differentiate themselves from the higher quality local milk chocolates.

So, if anything, it's the UK who are responsible for worsening our own chocolte and the EU are the ones trying to stop us.

And whilst it's true that portion sizes are getting smaller, that's not because of anything Europe are doing. It's down to the fact that cocoa is getting more expensive due to increased demand from places like China. If portion sizes are an issue, nobody is stopping consumers from buying two bars and paying for the privelege.
Click to expand...

Bit confused by your post, are saying that the UK producers of chocolate are not responsible for the maintaning/ increasing the quality of chocolate and its primarily the EU instead? That seems a very bold claim.

There are numerous companies of varying sizes that produce products of high quality (e.g. Hotel Chocolat, through to small independent craftisans), how exactly are the EU responsible for the drive of this type of chocolate and also 'trying to stop the UK from worsening it's chocolate' for these type of products?

If you are referring specifically to the more mainstream chocolate like cadburys (rather than the above), then I can understand where you are coming from to an extent (e.g. your point of labelling, which can discourage lower cocoa content), though i'd contend your point on how far "the UK' are responsible for the drop in quality. Beyond minimum standards, the overall quality of products are determined by companies and beyond the remit of governments. Also, chocolate under the Cadburys brand, is owned by a large international company and much of its production has shifted offshore, therefore its 'Britishness' has been significantly diluted. Meanwhile its overall quality has dropped due to changes in how the products have been designed and made, which as a sample article alludes to below, has been directed at corporate level

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/features/the-many-ways-cadbury-is-losing-its-magic/
 
Bola said:
Bit confused by your post, are saying that the UK producers of chocolate are not responsible for the maintaning/ increasing the quality of chocolate and its primarily the EU instead? That seems a very bold claim.

There are numerous companies of varying sizes that produce products of high quality (e.g. Hotel Chocolat, through to small independent craftisans), how exactly are the EU responsible for the drive of this type of chocolate and also 'trying to stop the UK from worsening it's chocolate' for these type of products?

If you are referring specifically to the more mainstream chocolate like cadburys (rather than the above), then I can understand where you are coming from to an extent (e.g. your point of labelling, which can discourage lower cocoa content), though i'd contend your point on how far "the UK' are responsible for the drop in quality. Beyond minimum standards, the overall quality of products are determined by companies and beyond the remit of governments. Also, chocolate under the Cadburys brand, is owned by a large international company and much of its production has shifted offshore, therefore its 'Britishness' has been significantly diluted. Meanwhile its overall quality has dropped due to changes in how the products have been designed and made, which as a sample article alludes to below, has been directed at corporate level

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/features/the-many-ways-cadbury-is-losing-its-magic/
Click to expand...

Translation: Desperately search for a way to blame the foreigners in the face of cold hard facts.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
I nearly forgot, I have some actual Brexit gossip this week in the same vein as the Nissan news.

One of my clients I teach is the head of digital marketing for a big multinational marketing agency, and one of their huge European multinational clients has just pulled a big campaign based on Brexit uncertainty. If they're doing it, I can only imagine that loads more companies are thinking in the same way. More actual, tangible bad news for the UK directly from Brexit and it's not even happened yet.
Click to expand...

There's going to be a run on investment funds moving to Ireland over the next few weeks. Traditional banks had to move earlier as banking licences are required, investment funds had the luxury of waiting a little longer. They'll move very soon.
 
Buster15 said:
At last. Somebody who actually understands the risks.
Well done.
Click to expand...
And further if you understand that, you’ll understand why Russia has had a dirty hand in the US presidential election and in the Brexit referendum- and indeed why both results should be annulled when proven
 
Bola said:
If you are talking about the backstop element for the Irish border, then there is no easy solution as you've alluded to. What is clear is that the NI being under a separate customs/ border regieme is unacceptable and neither should we have a hard border

My broad approach would be as follows.

- have a transition period of 2 years (give or take) where there is no customs border. This buys time for all involved to develop a solution. This includes the UK broadly following the principles of the customs union, but being able to negotiate deals for the future

- post this period, the best solution appears to be a variant of 'max fac', with simplification of tarrifs and customs processes, pre customs activity and use of technology

- the above is not the perfect solution however as there is still the age old problem of customs fraud which would return with a border (hard or frictionless) returning, particularly on a border with multiple crossing points. I can't see much more of a mitigation other that greater enforcement to act as a deterrent (which partly reduces the risk)

- A ' max fac' type solution would also be aided by the pursuit of free trade to remove the need for tarrifs on the majority of goods. That would be a tough pill for the EU to swallow given the construct of their whole 'project', but protectionism generally isn't a healthy ideology in my view

As i've said not ideal, but it's the basis of a solution and more of a solution of ignoring the issue of sovereignty of NI remaining under an EU trade regime, something that I've generally seen remainers ignore/ dismiss
Click to expand...

So your suggestion is a combo of more time, max fac, and technology.

What is more time going to achieve?

With the messing that has gone on from the UK side, including reneging on a deal, what incentive for the EU to allow more time?

Max fac has been dismissed by the UK side already due to cost mainly. What makes you think it will work?

Technology. What technology?

Some direct questions there, appreciate your thoughts.
 
Gee Male said:
So your suggestion is a combo of more time, max fac, and technology.

What is more time going to achieve?

More chance to find a working solution. The chances significantly increase with 2/3 years over 2 months

With the messing that has gone on from the UK side, including reneging on a deal, what incentive for the EU to allow more time?

If they care about their member state, they have a border issue to solve. It's in their interest to work to a solution. What they offered in the deal (that was rejected), is unworkable and in any negotiation of this type, there is an onus on both sides to find a compromise

Max fac has been dismissed by the UK side already due to cost mainly. What makes you think it will work?

There is the Malthouse proposals as a potential solution (what I call max fac, but there are variations), this is gaining Tory Party support.

As I highlighted in earlier posts, there is no perfect solution

Technology. What technology?

Mainly the ability to conduct pre-customs activity. There are also other examples on the Scandinavian border which could be used as part of a wider solution. Interestingly, they reckon a Malthouse solution could do it using existing tech

Some direct questions there, appreciate your thoughts.
Click to expand...

See answers above, bit busy, so they are short I'm afraid.

As highlighted, not an easy situation to solve.

Grateful for your thoughts on a solution that;

A) Fulfills the referendum of exiting the EU

B) Supports GFA

C) Ensures that the soverignty of the UK and NI is not undermind, such as the enactment of a trade border between parts of the UK
 
Bola said:
Would you care to refute or discuss any particular points, or are you just going to spam out one liners?
Click to expand...

There's enough other people in this thread who are better informed on the specifics of the things you're arguing on who have already refuted you. And, you're ignoring the facts that they've presented which run counter to your opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.