Remove ads

Hard vs Soft Brexit?

High levels of moderation
Forum rules
no trolling, name calling, no arguments.
Material posted here that is disparaging towards any group on the basis of race, faith, nationality, gender, disability or sexual orientation will be deleted and any poster of such material risks suspension.
johnhemming
Lemon Slice
Posts: 642
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Hard vs Soft Brexit?

#117818

Postby johnhemming » February 13th, 2018, 10:03 am

Nimrod103 wrote:I wasn't really trying to make a blinkered party political point, so much as pointing out that other parties contain mainly members and politicians who reject the unfettered private sector, and who believe that the state sector should be the cornerstone of of the UK economy.

The conservatives don't all believe that the private sector should be unregulated. The majority agree with some regulation. Furthermore in my experience the Lib Dem Parliamentary Party did not "believe that the state sector should be the cornerstone of of the UK economy."

johnhemming
Lemon Slice
Posts: 642
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Hard vs Soft Brexit?

#117820

Postby johnhemming » February 13th, 2018, 10:05 am

Nimrod103 wrote:Margaret Thatcher was a strong supporter of the Single Market in its complete form to include services (AIUI not implemented in the EU) but finally baulked at the cost in terms of submitting to Maastricht and Lisbon. Which is of course why she was defenestrated by the Tory grandees.

Lisbon was such a long time after Thatcher was removed that it cannot be part of causality. The main thing in the tory party is normally winning elections (unsurprisingly). She was deposed because they thought she would lose and to be fair to Major he won in 1992.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1067
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 117 times

Re: Hard vs Soft Brexit?

#117901

Postby Nimrod103 » February 13th, 2018, 4:00 pm

johnhemming wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:Margaret Thatcher was a strong supporter of the Single Market in its complete form to include services (AIUI not implemented in the EU) but finally baulked at the cost in terms of submitting to Maastricht and Lisbon. Which is of course why she was defenestrated by the Tory grandees.

Lisbon was such a long time after Thatcher was removed that it cannot be part of causality. The main thing in the tory party is normally winning elections (unsurprisingly). She was deposed because they thought she would lose and to be fair to Major he won in 1992.


It is true that Mrs Thatcher's popularity had waned, mainly perhaps because she had outlived all but one of her early ministers, so did not give the impression of leading a united Govt any more. The coup de grace was given by her longest surviving minister Geoffrey Howe (to quote Wikipedia):
On 1 November 1990, Geoffrey Howe, the last remaining member of Thatcher's original 1979 cabinet, resigned from his position as Deputy Prime Minister over her refusal to agree to a timetable for Britain to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism
Subsequent events showed that on this, like so much else, she had been right and the establishment, party grandees and civil servants were wrong, very wrong.
After the Delors and Bruges speeches, it is inconceivable that Mrs Thatcher would have signed Maastricht if she had still been PM. But her successor and all the other Tory grandees supported Maastricht and ERM with gusto, and that was the fateful mistake.

Sundance13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 913
Joined: March 15th, 2017, 1:02 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 60 times

Re: Hard vs Soft Brexit?

#117918

Postby Sundance13 » February 13th, 2018, 4:53 pm

Nimrod103 wrote:
johnhemming wrote:
Nimrod103 wrote:Margaret Thatcher was a strong supporter of the Single Market in its complete form to include services (AIUI not implemented in the EU) but finally baulked at the cost in terms of submitting to Maastricht and Lisbon. Which is of course why she was defenestrated by the Tory grandees.

Lisbon was such a long time after Thatcher was removed that it cannot be part of causality. The main thing in the tory party is normally winning elections (unsurprisingly). She was deposed because they thought she would lose and to be fair to Major he won in 1992.


It is true that Mrs Thatcher's popularity had waned, mainly perhaps because she had outlived all but one of her early ministers, so did not give the impression of leading a united Govt any more. The coup de grace was given by her longest surviving minister Geoffrey Howe (to quote Wikipedia):
On 1 November 1990, Geoffrey Howe, the last remaining member of Thatcher's original 1979 cabinet, resigned from his position as Deputy Prime Minister over her refusal to agree to a timetable for Britain to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism
Subsequent events showed that on this, like so much else, she had been right and the establishment, party grandees and civil servants were wrong, very wrong.
After the Delors and Bruges speeches, it is inconceivable that Mrs Thatcher would have signed Maastricht if she had still been PM. But her successor and all the other Tory grandees supported Maastricht and ERM with gusto, and that was the fateful mistake.



For once we agree!

Thatcher had come to realise the direction the EU was taking and certainly wouldn’t have supported Maastricht. That said I don’t think the Federalist threat is as strong now as it was back then, partly because the EU now has more members, many of whom are opposed to a US of Europe.

I also don’t believe she’d be daft enough to take us out of the single market and she wouldn’t have suffered fools like Boris and his bizarre deregulation fantasies.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1067
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 117 times

Re: Hard vs Soft Brexit?

#117940

Postby Nimrod103 » February 13th, 2018, 6:15 pm

Sundance13 wrote:Thatcher had come to realise the direction the EU was taking and certainly wouldn’t have supported Maastricht. That said I don’t think the Federalist threat is as strong now as it was back then, partly because the EU now has more members, many of whom are opposed to a US of Europe.


My view has been and remains that the federalist threat is the biggest issue of all. The organs of the EU are specifically designed to give rise to a unelected dictatorship of technocrats, outside of normal democratic control. The European Parliament is very large, riven by faction and nationality, well remunerated and toothless. Post Brexit I am sure we will see a further consolidation of the Franco-German axis, running things very much to their own advantage, while the outlying and smaller countries are dependent on EU handouts, and on the stability to their economies which being assoiated with Germany brings. Those countries will probably not rock the boat, and any dash for self determination will be squashed.


Return to “Polite Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest