Turn on thread page Beta

Why is the public NOT happy with May's excellent Brexit deal? It's a total win for UK watch

Announcements
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    Well I'd suggest that you read what I've outlined - it's literally in bullet points. I cannot see how any deal could be better than this one. You almost keep a single market access without being a member (ending freedom of movement, ECJ jurisdiction, regulations and directives, common fisheries/agriculture and other policies), for merely 39 bln (that's not a lot - again you practically keep the single market access).
    its irrelevant due to what I already replied.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    I think you are right in that it’s the best we’ll get.

    The issue is it is worse than Remaining (so Leave voters are now doing a nice 180 on that) as it devoids us of any influence in then EU.

    Really, this speaks to the delusion of Brexiters, thinking we could just walk cleanly. The government has finally admitted that in all cases we will be poorer. In particular, the economy will be hit hardest by a No Deal/Hard Brexit.

    As I think many of us has discussed, a clean break was never possible and so I do think this is the best possible deal under the circumstances. But what it has highlighted is the same problem all along. That is, Brexiters cannot agree on what they want. Thus, they’re destroying themselves.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    I think you are right in that it’s the best we’ll get.

    The issue is it is worse than Remaining (so Leave voters are now doing a nice 180 on that) as it devoids us of any influence in then EU.

    Really, this speaks to the delusion of Brexiters, thinking we could just walk cleanly. The government has finally admitted that in all cases we will be poorer. In particular, the economy will be hit hardest by a No Deal/Hard Brexit.

    As I think many of us has discussed, a clean break was never possible and so I do think this is the best possible deal under the circumstances. But what it has highlighted is the same problem all along. That is, Brexiters cannot agree on what they want. Thus, they’re destroying themselves.
    Nope, parliament has ensured that this is as good a deal we can get without having a no deal brexit first, all the obstruction by MP's who didn't like the result and have tried their best to hinder the process is why we now need the clean break.
    If parliament had accepted and got behind the result then a better deal would have been possible.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by ColinDent)
    Nope, parliament has ensured that this is as good a deal we can get without having a no deal brexit first, all the obstruction by MP's who didn't like the result and have tried their best to hinder the process is why we now need the clean break.
    If parliament had accepted and got behind the result then a better deal would have been possible.
    Doubt it, Parliament had next to no influence at all on the negotiations, that was all Tory. Plus, the EU were never going to waver on their red lines.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    rip economy, rip British influence in the world.

    The reality of brexit is finally settling in to all, no cherrypicking without being a member !
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    The public isn't happy because either A) it isn't remain, or B) it isn't what they were promised.

    Leave massively overstated how well leaving would go, and people took that as gospel. Now that the negotiating team has come back with the deal they got, which is what the more moderate and educated leave voters were expecting, those harder Leave voters think that May has come back with a bad deal because it isn't anywhere near as good as what they were promised.

    Labour has also been contributing to this by using the deal as a political move, in practice this is exactly the same deal that Labour would've ended up with.

    Honestly, Labour could've agreed with it and it would've been a massive advantage for the party. The Conservatives would've welcomed a break from the DUP, a lot of voters would've loved the slightly left and progressive Con-Lab megacoalition and it would've produced a much more workable country in the future by showing this coalition is viable. While having Labour in power would cause a stock market drop, this would be far outweighed by the stability advantage.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    So I cannot quite understand why isn't the public opinion happy with what Theresa May has managed to negotiate - I mean really, what exactly did they expect? What kind of a deal if not this one? Please explain.

    To my understanding it's a total win for the UK (it could not have been better):

    - Ends free movement of people as this was apparently the biggest (if not the only reason) for Brexit
    - Guarantees right to remain for those who lived for 5 years or more in Britain and for British in continental Europe
    - Leaves customs union and the single market
    - Ends common agricultural/fisheries and other common policies
    - Ends ECJ jurisdiction
    - Ends directives and regulations of the EU
    - Enables a very close access to the single market post-Brexit

    Really - what else did the public expect? Please enlighten me. It's literally the best possible deal.

    Also, this is a separate point but do the 52% of people consider that 48% did want to remain altogether?

    This is a hard brexit deal in my opinion anyway, like what else would you want? Shut down of La Manche?
    Bad deal

    EU has control over laws, all things we wanted back we aren't
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by random_matt)
    It's a worse position than staying in the EU, May is in denial and the EU are hoping we change our minds.
    Yes it's worse than remaining. But all deals will be. I can't think of a deal where we'll come of better
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    Doubt it, Parliament had next to no influence at all on the negotiations, that was all Tory. Plus, the EU were never going to waver on their red lines.
    Of course not, the EU will be wobbling like a weeble if it does start to look like a no deal.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    So I cannot quite understand why isn't the public opinion happy with what Theresa May has managed to negotiate - I mean really, what exactly did they expect? What kind of a deal if not this one? Please explain.

    To my understanding it's a total win for the UK (it could not have been better):

    - Ends free movement of people as this was apparently the biggest (if not the only reason) for Brexit
    - Guarantees right to remain for those who lived for 5 years or more in Britain and for British in continental Europe
    - Leaves customs union and the single market
    - Ends common agricultural/fisheries and other common policies
    - Ends ECJ jurisdiction
    - Ends directives and regulations of the EU
    - Enables a very close access to the single market post-Brexit

    Really - what else did the public expect? Please enlighten me. It's literally the best possible deal.

    Also, this is a separate point but do the 52% of people consider that 48% did want to remain altogether?

    This is a hard brexit deal in my opinion anyway, like what else would you want? Shut down of La Manche?
    Thank you for taking the time to write this post! I think what you've highlighted are some really great parts of the deal, but in order to understand why we think this deal is so terrible you may wish to research further how this deal addresses:
    The NI border
    Trade deals with other countries
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    WTO only really addresses goods. Services under GATS is underdeveloped and ignored. And there's a reason every WTO signatory has an RTA rather than deals exclusively on "WTO terms"; more and more are dealing with services. I quote WTO terms because RTAs, and EU, are in fact part of the WTO's dynamics. It is not as if we have not been dealing with the EU on WTO terms since our membership began.

    And the GATT, while great and one of the most important agreements out there, does involve tariffed trade in goods. Meaning we will be subject to tariffs, which businesses say they cannot withstand or else they will lose out to EU-based competition, regarding intra-EU trade. That's why we would need an FTA+ with the EU, at the very least, even with regard to goods. But, as above, RTAs are part and parcel of the WTO world. They are part of "WTO terms".

    WTO also doesn't deal with anything else. E.g. cooperating in security and police investigations, extradition, whether we can sell our banking, accountancy and legal services to EU-MSs, and importantly how each country resolves these non-trade disputes. Do they ad hoc go the ICJ when something messy arises, or have a prolonged stand-off?
    well heaven knows how New Zealand and Australia cope outside of the EU.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CollectiveSoul)
    well heaven knows how New Zealand and Australia cope outside of the EU.
    They do it by having intensive RTAs with their neighbours, including with each other. ASEAN is the big one, and they have TPP, RCEP and TiSA in the pipeworks. Latter of which is with the EU and they're also trying to negotiate a goods deal with the EU.

    Normally countries trade with their neighbours. America intensively trades with Mexico and Canada, and have Nafta; 34% of US exports is to their Nafta compatriots. Aus's is 33.5% China, 14.6% Japan, 6.6% South Korea. New Zealand is China 22.4%, Australia 16.4%. UK's is: Germany 10.5%, France 7.4%, Netherlands 6.2%, Ireland 5.6%, Switzerland 4.5%.

    Countries manage their economies by trading first and foremost with their neighbours. RTAs are vital.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    They do it by having intensive RTAs with their neighbours, including with each other. ASEAN is the big one, and they have TPP, RCEP and TiSA in the pipeworks. Latter of which is with the EU and they're also trying to negotiate a goods deal with the EU.

    Normally countries trade with their neighbours. America intensively trades with Mexico and Canada, and have Nafta; 34% of US exports is to their Nafta compatriots. Aus's is 33.5% China, 14.6% Japan, 6.6% South Korea. New Zealand is China 22.4%, Australia 16.4%. UK's is: Germany 10.5%, France 7.4%, Netherlands 6.2%, Ireland 5.6%, Switzerland 4.5%.

    Countries manage their economies by trading first and foremost with their neighbours. RTAs are vital.
    well isn't it fortunate then that the world is getting smaller with global trade more important than ever
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SMEGGGY)
    EU has control over laws, all things we wanted back we aren't
    All? So we didn't want a reduction of freedom of movement or removal from the CAP or CFP?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    All? So we didn't want a reduction of freedom of movement or removal from the CAP or CFP?
    A couple of things don't equate to us leaving with what we voted for
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    All? So we didn't want a reduction of freedom of movement or removal from the CAP or CFP?
    Those things will be up for debate in the trade talks....
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Cough cough its labour making a fuss when they can't even make a deal themselves cough cough.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SMEGGGY)
    A couple of things don't equate to us leaving with what we voted for
    So we didn't vote for an end unskilled workers coming into the UK and living of the taxpayers money through benifits?
    So we didn't vote for control over our laws?
    So we didn't vote for control over our own waters?
    So we didn't vote for us to make our own trade deals?
    So we what did we vote?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SMEGGGY)
    A couple of things don't equate to us leaving with what we voted for
    To be perfectly honest, I don't think anyone knew what they were voting for. The question was vague and open to infinite numbers of interpretation. I seem to remember some leave campaigners telling us the NHS would be £350 million a week better off. That turned out to be a lie yet you are now telling me that leavers are not getting what they voted for. Just exactly what were they promised that wasn't a lie or mistruth? No one actually knows.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Those things will be up for debate in the trade talks....
    Eh? I thought they were part of the agreement that goes live on 29th March. Are you saying we might negotiate to go back into the CAP?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like exams?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.