Plot to keep UK in customs union and water down immigration and border controls

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • I am getting fed up with the BBC and their constant headline depiction of the remainer's customs arrangements option.

    It's the inherant bias, in this case anti-BREXIT, at the BBC that produces these headlines. It's rather subtle though as it's often in the running order or putting a strange slant on the subject.

    A recent example was the BBC news headline that 30% of companies had not made provision for a revised customs proceedure with EU countries, that could have been a headline: 70% of companies HAVE made provision. Maybe a good percentage of those that hadn't were already trading with non-EU countries or didn't do any international trade.

    Making things sound negative without ACTUALLY breaking "impartiality" rules.

  • The way that remainers go on about we MUST have a customs arrangement, I wonder how the non-EU imports and exports actually reach their destination. They make it sound impossible!

    The EU importers and exporters have had a very easy life, thanks to UK taxpayers, and don't want to lose their privileges. They care nothing for the bulk of our exporters (78%) that do NOT export to the EU, or those companies that do not export at all, but are still subjected to the costs of implementing EU rules and OTT legislation.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Re the transportation of non-EU goods, perhaps they get teleported! 8o Although as I was at Folkestone last weekend, I saw another method.

    The only reason the UK said right at the start of this process that we had to leave the customs union was because the French and Germans insisted on it. In particular they kept quoting the four freedoms of the of the EU to us and said they were indivisible. If you don't accept free movement, they said, you cannot have free trade like the customs union, so our reply was fine. That was a mistake by our weak government and it should've been negotiated, although perhaps May was correct on that one and never wasted time and energy arguing the point with them.

    It's the inherant bias, in this case anti-BREXIT, at the BBC that produces these headlines. It's rather subtle though as it's often in the running order or putting a strange slant on the subject.

    I think that everyone else here was against the idea of the UK collecting tariffs on behalf of the EU, that's part of the remainer's customs option, but that's a red herring. It's the BBC highlighting that info above the fact that we would have to abide by EU law one way or the other, which is the problem. A "subtle" difference indeed!

  • I don't know how true this is, but on the BBC's This Week programmes last night, Andrew Neil said the government is going to go ahead with a customs arrangement with the EU that keeps us in the single market in all but name. If true, expect things to explode from the Conservative leaver side soon.

  • Looks like there is "some" truth to it....::cursing:

    Plans for the UK to keep ties to the customs union temporarily after Brexit features on several newspaper front pages, alongside more build-up to Saturday's royal wedding.

    The Financial Times says the prime minister has conceded that Britain will have to remain tied to a customs union after 2021 until an alternative can be found to having a hard border in Ireland.

    Under the plan, the paper says, the whole of the UK will be covered by the EU's common external tariff, removing the need for a customs border in Ireland or between Ireland and the UK mainland.


  • If true, that's our hopes of FTA's with other countries down the drain, and our country will continue to be bled dry by the EU. Also, the end of our sham democracy. We will know that democracy no longer exists in the UK, as in the other EU countries. It is all a pretence.

    Monnet wasn't far off the mark was he .... “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”

    Is it possible to leave the EU? It had better be. Apart from remainers, who wants to live in an undemocratic country where the wishes of the majority are so blatantly ignored?

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Mind you all this brouhaha is conditional on all 27 EU members voting for the deal and that's certainly not guaranteed. Planning has to be made for a hard exit in March 2019 and that means a hard border with NI.

    If May proposes this fudge I consider that those who voted to leave will have been betrayed. We could be entering the next election, still not really having left the EU and if Corbyn's lot got in we'd be catapulted straight back into the EU for keeps.

  • .....

    If May proposes this fudge I consider that those who voted to leave will have been betrayed. We could be entering the next election, still not really having left the EU and if Corbyn's lot got in we'd be catapulted straight back into the EU for keeps.

    Which is exactly what happened from 1973 onwards, until UKIP came along. We will be given a choice of pro-EU parties, and nothing else. We need UKIP to get themselves sorted pronto, and become a viable alternative.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • The Tories will be annihilated at the next election if they try to renege on Brexit , if you leave something , you leave and do no still remain attached , be it marriage or job .All this BS about this and that not being on the ballot paper must be shown as what it is , reasons to remain.

  • Why not just withdraw our application to leave the EU?

    Or......

    Just leave without a deal and say to the EU "by now you know what we want, which is to trade with the EU without being ruled by the EU and to be able to control our borders. You have rejected every proposal to serve that aim and have offered no better suggestions. Instead your position is that EU rules are a tablet of stone. On that basis we have been wasting our time. We shall leave the EU on the agreed date. If between now and then you have any positive suggestions for trading with us, where we buy EU goods and you buy British goods, without trying to make difficulties or disadvantage our country, you know how to get in touch - but we shan't be holding our breath".

    Edited once, last by casablanca (July 4, 2018 at 12:37 AM).

  • Why not just withdraw our application to leave the EU?

    ... because ...

    1) our politicians would be admitting that democracy is dead in the UK.

    2) when the politicians voted to allow the electorate to decide, they lied, as it would appear that it was dependent upon us voting for remain.

    3) there is nothing in Article 50 that would allow withdrawal, however, I am sure the EU would make a quick treaty change to enable it, unlike Cameron's 'EU reforms'.

    4) any withdrawal would see the UK treated even more unfavourably by the EU, and would finish us off for good.

    To be fair to the EU I would be pretty damned angry if I had gone through all this upset for nothing, and what would they hope to achieve if politicians force membership on an electorate who do not want to be part of the EU? That is what got us here in the first place. It isn't a solution, for the UK or the EU. It just kicks the can down the road and would likely result in civil war when they admit to 1 and 2 listed above.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I guess we'll see what happens. Perhaps May's thinking is what Heero said in that the other countries have got to vote through the deal and perhaps she considers this the easiest solution, if true.

    I said last year that I confidently predicted that May would've be gone by conference season. If she fudges this issue, then I "suggest" that this year she'll definitely be gone.

    Leave means leave, not fudging, not kicking cans.

  • On Peston's programme a few minutes ago, supposedly one of the Sunday papers has been tipped off that if May can't break the Brexit deadline by Autumn, she'll call another election. :rolleyes:

    Why can't she just resign and save everyone a lot of time and money at such a key moment?

  • The post-Brexit customs system favoured by Boris Johnson and other leading Brexiteers could cost businesses up to £20bn a year, officials have suggested.

    The chief executive of HM Revenue and Customs told MPs firms would have to pay £32.50 for each customs declaration under the so-called "max fac" solution.

    Nice little scare story this one....:rolleyes:

    But if true, then for a start the £32.50 could easily be reduced. Ain't it tough work coming up with these "incredible" remedies...? The problem is noone in the civil service wants Brexit to happen, that's the real story here.

    Further down the article, the £32.50 has been said in advice to ministers to only be a "plausible" figure, ie totally made up!

  • It amazes me the rubbish that remainers dish out and think we will blindly accept it as the truth. I suppose desperation is setting in!

    Facts:

    1. most of our trade is with non-EU countries, ie. NO CUSTOMS UNION involved, and there are no taxpayer funded benefits to reduce customs checks or tariffs, and they still have to comply with OTT EU red tape. Despite all this, non-EU trade is on the increase.

    2. EU trade is in decline, despite taxpayer funded benefits.

    The remainers would like us to believe that trade outside the customs union is very expensive, if not virtually impossible.

    I agree that companies that trade with EU countries have an enormous advantage, and I am not surprised they want to hold onto their taxpayer funded advantages, but I wish they would be more honest about their reasons.

    Listen to remainers and you will wonder how the hell do non-EU countries (the majority in this world) manage to survive, never mind grow!

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I think this is May trying to fire a warning shot over any who might try and unseat her, that if they try, she scupper the mutiny with calling an election.

    I think "trying" is a very appropriate word for May, she is a bit of a damp squib when it comes to warning shots. :P

  • Thanks Fidget for putting some interesting flesh on my 1-line comment of voluntary capitulation

    Taking each of your points ....

    1) Democracy dead? But can you really view democracy as an absolute? If we the public elect MPs to represent us, we have to accept that their decisions might not accord with ours and surely it is crudely simplistic to insist that any government decisions must always represent a majority view, even if it is 52% of those who chose to vote.

    2) Lying politicians? Gee, there's a surprise! Surely you would agree that democracy is not perfect and that what it prescribes should not be a treated as tablet of stone, least of all when flaws are revealed. The Government generally and Cameron specifically undermined democracy by holding a referendum that was invalidated by mendacity or stupidity, both in underlying purpose and execution. I'm not being wise after the event; the information campaign designed to enable the public to exercise an informed vote was disgracefully incompetent, ignorant, misleading and biased. The notion - never spelt out - that a majority vote (>50%) would carry the day - was a moronic definition of democracy which morphed into counterfeit democracy when fuelled by political propaganda rather than impartial or at least balanced facts and predictions. Who in their right minds would uphold that as a democracy worth having?

    3) Withdrawal of Article 50 may or may not be possible. The EU have gone on record as saying that they would be pleased if the UK withdrew their Article 50 and chose to remain as an EU member. The EU may or may not have changed their mind since saying that. We ought to find out, preferably behind closed doors - the trouble is that leaks from MPs to media kills that kind of discreet enquiry.

    4) You may well be right that the UK will be poorly treated by the EU after withdrawing Article 50. Worse still, our global status will plunge. Everyone will know that withdrawing Article 50 signifies defeat in the so-called negotiations. Then again, that defeat is largely self-inflicted by Parliament and in particular the Upper House. What's the alternative? The Government's attempt to provide a soft Brexit is the anti-climax of the century, where we end up abandoning membership privileges while still being a prisoner of the EU's major regulations, the very one's which influenced the vote of 52% to leave. So we will not only be viewed by the EU and the rest of the world as a bunch of losers but also as a bunch of fools. We may feel anxious about the EU's creeping ambition for federalisation but I'm beginning to think we need the UK's 21st century style of sovereignty like a hole in the head.

    Ordinarily I would be in favour of leaving without a deal and let the EU decide whether to deal with us or freeze us out. We can definitely survive without the EU. It could be the making of us. But we no longer have a government system, style, strength of character, integrity, courage or vision to take that stands for true independence. Nor do we any longer appear to have the kind of citizens or media that would encourage that to happen. Instead, what we have are citizens who will argue, march in protest and ultimately instigate a civil war. Over what? They're not quite sure, anything will do, as long as they can be heard and, with any luck, get interviewed by BBC TV or worse still Channel 4 News. All laughingly known as "popular democracy"

  • The remainers would like us to believe that trade outside the customs union is very expensive, if not virtually impossible.

    With lots of our fruit and veg coming from far flung places like Africa and South America and most of our electronics coming from East Asia, you'd think that line that the remainers keep pushing would go stale now, but it seems not.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!