We can't stay in "the" customs union, and indeed we aren't - as has been confirmed by No.10 many, many, many times. We're also leaving the single market. Of course "a" customs union would be lovely, as long as we don't have to accept EU rules such as freedom of movement, and we can sign our own trade deals independently. Unfortunately the EU are very unlikely to agree to that, although they could surprise us bearing in mind the Irish and Channel borders, and the high levels of trade and economic integration between the UK and the EU. A (not quite free) trade agreement is also likely.

I'm perfectly happy to leave it to our elected representative to negotiate it as long as they honour the vote. That's why they were elected. I'd say the same if it was Labour (except Diane Abbott). They understand that 'leave means leave', and are largely ignoring the bluster and those seeking to block Brexit. Oh, of course if you listen to the BBC, C4 and left-wing rags you probably aren't happy, but in fact negotiations have gone pretty much as most reasonable people predicted.


Tough, that's democracy in action. You don't keep going back until the minority get the result they want.

Unless you're the EU.

No you get a chance to kick them out a few years later, and I bet you spend the intervening years moaning about how stupid the electorate were to vote them in in the first place.
The reason I say it should have been 60% is that there will be no chance to change our minds 4/5 years down the line. We should have another vote, confirm the last one if for no other reason than that the decision is so final.

Perhaps we should leave it to the editor of the Daily Mail? After all he's as constant as the North Star. Or maybe he isn't.
What did he say about the House of Lords the other week? "Traitors" "IT'S TIME TO PULL THE PLUG ON THE HOUSE OF LORDS... WITH EACH DAY THIS HOUSE LOOKS RIPER FOR THE ABATOIR"
Funny that, because in 1998 when New Labour wanted to start reforming the Lords what did he say?
"What Blair wants isn't a more modern House of Lords but a more pliant House of Lords"
Or in 1999 on the same subject "if it ain't broke don't fix it"
Or in 2000 when the Lords blocked the removal of the iniquitous Clause 28 ""the Lords have shown they are truly representative of the people"
Or in 2001 "We are moving to a form of elective dictatorship" funny then that he supported Theresa May's attempt by using powers granted to Henry VIII to by-pass parliament entirely.
2007, on another Labour defeat "Praise be to the Lords"
or finally in 2011 with the coalition in power, again on Lords reform "Nick Clegg has chosen to clog up parliamentary time with the utterly irrelevant distraction of a bill to reform the Lords"

In other words they'd do anything, say anything, bend any rule, to get their own way. It's THAT important to them. The question we should all be asking ourselves is why these normally self centred men should be expending such large amounts of their time, money and influence to get this through. What's in it for them? But unfortunately, no one on either side of the political divide seems to have the guts to ask that question

Well, you'll be able to moan about how stupid the 52% are forever.

Why 60%? It's an arbitrary number with no basis in psephology whatsoever. Why not 55%? 70%? Or even...52%?

Yes, I realise we get the opportunity to change the government after their term, but you don't get to spit your dummy and re-run the General Election if you don't like the result. Political discussion on the left has devolved to school-yard levels: too many believe that if you don't win and don't agree, shout and shout until you get your way.

Here's a lesson for you: voting in a democracy does not mean trying again and again until the minority win.

Always been sore losers, the left.

"You lost - get over it."

"If you don't like it, go live in the EU."

and...



Lovely stuff.

The battle may have been lost but, the war, it seems, is still ongoing.
He who laughs last and all that

Mind you, even though YOU knew what YOU were voting for, I'll be really surprised if you get it and it's that thought that is keeping me going for now.

I'm glad I'm in your thoughts so much.

We'll see. Ultimately the government can ignore the Lords, the Scots and all the bluster and get on with their negotiations, which are actually going pretty well. Any interference weakens the UK and I'll warn you here and now that if the opposition start playing politics with the 'meaningful vote', things could crash quickly and that's when we could face a cliff edge.

The cliff edge was there all along but, no issue with getting your excuses in early.
Even Brexitiers like your good self have said that we are likely to be worse off financially after Brexit and if this was, in any way, the optimistic outlook, who knows where we will end up.
The price of democracy always affects some more than others and many Brexitiers were convinced that we would all be better off

Unlike Jeremy Corbyn and his cronies, of course, whose stance on various issues (especially Brexit) swings and changes as part of their cynical vote-winning strategy.

A blatant example would be their u-turn on the customs union. Contrary to the previous party line, Corbyn suddenly decided the UK would stay in the customs union, but an all-singing, all-dancing bespoke customs union offering the absolutely perfect Brexit scenario in some weird dreamland.

He knows the EU would sooner invade Crimea that agree to his claims, yet Labour shout it from the rooftops knowing some people will be fooled. Even many Labour MPs and voters were up in arms. Cynical and dishonest.

It's THAT important to them.

Of course the possibility of a cliff edge was always there. What naive Remoaners didn't seem to understand is that the bluster and hard talk from both sides was simply tactical positioning prior to the negotiations. In reality discussions have been reasonable and aimed at achieving the best result for both sides. Not perfect, but progressive.

However, there's always the chance the opposition will decide to play political hardball and kibosh ANYTHING the government proposes, which would mean WTO terms at best and the hardest possible Brexit (although I hate the hard/soft terminology). I don't actually think they will - I think even Labour realise the backlash would be of biblical proportions and would ultimately backfire on them. But it probably won't stop the SNP and Liberals.

As I've said many times on here, yes, slightly worse off in the short term, better off in the long term. In more ways than just the economy.