Brexit and the Deal We Were Promised.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

To be clear I am not framing this as a argument to justify remaining in the EU its just me pointing out that the promise was made.

Now you asked exactly where that quote could be found as I have provided the link on the OP, if you scroll down to the bottom of that page there is a slideshow (which they also used as a official leaflet) its on page 10 I believe.

Again, nope.
There was no promise of a deal.
Reread your own referenced quote.

...Yes I eventually found the statement in the slideshow. It's the 4th bullet point buried in the presentation and states an intent to negotiate a new deal. Not a promise of a deal. Any person who takes the time to read the website can see clearly that the campaign is about leaving, not leaving IF we do a deal.

Again, I am not claiming that this is argument against not leaving I only highlighting that they said we would leave with a negotiated deal and thats probably not going to happen.

Kinda starting to feel you're getting into Stawman territory here.

Again, no.
The statement was that we would negotiate a deal.
We have negotiated. We can't get a deal.
We're still trying to negotiate to avoid a no deal scenario.

There was never any condition of a deal tied to leaving and THAT is the key point.

For your entire line of thinking to be relevant you'd have to believe that the British people were voting to leave IF the EU offered us a deal that was acceptable to Parliament. In simple terms, you're line of thinking has been debunked.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

To be clear I am not framing this as a argument to justify remaining in the EU its just me pointing out that the promise was made.

Now you asked exactly where that quote could be found as I have provided the link on the OP, if you scroll down to the bottom of that page there is a slideshow (which they also used as a official leaflet) its on page 10 I believe.

Again, nope.
There was no promise of a deal.
Reread your own referenced quote.

...Yes I eventually found the statement in the slideshow. It's the 4th bullet point buried in the presentation and states an intent to negotiate a new deal. Not a promise of a deal. Any person who takes the time to read the website can see clearly that the campaign is about leaving, not leaving IF we do a deal.

Again, I am not claiming that this is argument against not leaving I only highlighting that they said we would leave with a negotiated deal and thats probably not going to happen.

Kinda starting to feel you're getting into Stawman territory here.

Again, no.
The statement was that we would negotiate a deal.
We have negotiated. We can't get a deal.

There was never any condition of a deal tied to leaving and THAT is the key point.

Yes I can read they said we will negotiate a deal.

If you read through their site there is loads of stuff about the kind of deal we can expect including a UK/EU Treaty.

That's what they claimed would be happening its a promise in the same way the government saying "we will abolish tuition fees" might not have the word promise in it but its what they said they were going to do. Its what VoteLeave said they would do. My point in this thread is just to highlight that because quite often I see members of this site claiming that the prospect of a deal was never on the table back when the vote took place. That is simply not true.

And yes we did get a deal negotiated and its turned out to be utter crap that couldn't get through parliament.

For your entire line of thinking to be relevant you'd have to believe that the British people were voting to leave IF the EU offered us a deal that was acceptable to Parliament. In simple terms, you're line of thinking has been debunked.

Again with the Strawman, my line of thinking is thus....

I have several times seen members on this site and on others make the claim that there was never any talk or promise of a deal in the run up to the vote. I have written this thread to provide sources that demonstrate that actually, yeah VoteLeave said we would have a deal negotiated for leaving the EU and this is not happening.

To be crystal clear because you seem to be struggling with this.....

I am not arguing in anyway that this means that we should stop Brexit or that a No-deal Brexit is therefore invalid.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

To be clear I am not framing this as a argument to justify remaining in the EU its just me pointing out that the promise was made.

Now you asked exactly where that quote could be found as I have provided the link on the OP, if you scroll down to the bottom of that page there is a slideshow (which they also used as a official leaflet) its on page 10 I believe.

Again, nope.
There was no promise of a deal.
Reread your own referenced quote.

...Yes I eventually found the statement in the slideshow. It's the 4th bullet point buried in the presentation and states an intent to negotiate a new deal. Not a promise of a deal. Any person who takes the time to read the website can see clearly that the campaign is about leaving, not leaving IF we do a deal.

Again, I am not claiming that this is argument against not leaving I only highlighting that they said we would leave with a negotiated deal and thats probably not going to happen.

Kinda starting to feel you're getting into Stawman territory here.

Again, no.
The statement was that we would negotiate a deal.
We have negotiated. We can't get a deal.

There was never any condition of a deal tied to leaving and THAT is the key point.

Yes I can read they said we will negotiate a deal.

If you read through their site there is loads of stuff about the kind of deal we can expect including a UK/EU Treaty.

That's what they claimed would be happening its a promise in the same way the government saying "we will abolish tuition fees" might not have the word promise in it but its what they said they were going to do. Its what VoteLeave said they would do. My point in this thread is just to highlight that because quite often I see members of this site claiming that the prospect of a deal was never on the table back when the vote took place. That is simply not true.

And yes we did get a deal negotiated and its turned out to be utter crap that couldn't get through parliament.

Nope. It is not the same as the Govt. saying 'we will abolish tuition fees'. Such a claim would be entirely in the remit of the Govt. That is why they clearly stated that a deal would be negotiated.
As I stated, we are and have been negotiating, but the EU do not want to give us a deal.
Like I said, the British people never voted to leave on the condition of a deal. To suggest they did is pure propaganda clearly designed to prop up an anti-democratic position.

As for your argument that people said there was no mention of a deal, again that is false. People said that we did not vote to leave if we got a deal. You are conflating that with a minor statement buried deep on the Leave website about negotiating a deal.

Either way, your argument is in fact a straw man.

a reply to: UKTruth

Like I said, the British people never voted to leave on the condition of a deal.

When the British people voted as the VoteLeave website shows as part of that sale they where being sold on the idea that a deal would be in place.

A UK/EU Treaty by May 2020, thats what their website said, these are there words not mine.

you are wrong and I honestly cannot be bothered going round in circles anymore, wallow in your ignorance if you want.

I've posted what Porky the PM said at the time, it was a simple 'in' or 'out' vote.

The UK government spent over 9 million pounds of our own money on a pamphlet
to convince us to stay in, we decided we wanted out.

We all know why we are not out, we all know why the deal May came up with was awful.

We are quite rightly a laughing stock.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

Like I said, the British people never voted to leave on the condition of a deal.

When the British people voted as the VoteLeave website shows as part of that sale they where being sold on the idea that a deal would be in place.

A UK/EU Treaty by May 2020, thats what their website said, these are there words not mine.

you are wrong and I honestly cannot be bothered going round in circles anymore, wallow in your ignorance if you want.

You don't want to 'go round in circles' because the discussion highlights the propaganda.
There was only the promise that we would negotiate with the EU. A conditional exit from the EU based on a deal was simply never a part of the vote.

Moreover you have cmpletely failed to mention that the Treasury Dept released a study on the BREXIT scenarios in March 2016, including a WTO exit in the event of no deal. So I assume to you that means that the British people were informed. After all, a bullet point 4 of slide 11 of a presentation on the Leave Campaign's site is enough for you to suggest that people were voting to leave based on a deal, so a Treasury Dept report should be just as significant.

What you've done is searched for and cherry picked a paragraph, misrepresnted it and ignored all other information available at the time in order to pretend that the people of this country voted to leave under the conditions of a deal. That is dishonest in the extreme. You've further muddied the waters by pretending that Leavers have said there was no mention of a deal. That is also untrue. What has been said, correctly, is that people did not VOTE to leave on condition of a deal OR that people did not vote on condition there would not be a no deal.

Shame on you for peddling the same propaganda as we're currently hearing from the traitors trying to stop us leaving the EU.

That's what they claimed would be happening its a promise in the same way the government saying "we will abolish tuition fees" might not have the word promise in it but its what they said they were going to do.

Semantics , aka arguing about the meaning of words . We were not promised a deal , end of .

The list of live saving - critical to survival meds that have run out are about to run out in the UK is taking the piss now - have two weeks to live unless they get their act together. Everything had returned to normal after initial scares and shortages in Feb but since Boris got in a lot of manufactures (especially French ones) have stopped shipping to the UK or are in the middle of overhauling the entire UK distribution hubs in preperation for no-deal.

---
We have heard from Teva, the makers of Gabitril, that Gabitril will not be back in stock before the end of October. This further delay is caused by a problem with part of the manufacturing process. This is a Europe-wide issue.
-
Epanutin oral suspension is still out of stock. It was hoped that it would be back in stock by now. Pfizer, the makers of Epanutin, are not yet able to provide a date when it is expected to be back in stock. If you have any concerns about this continuing shortage of Epanutin oral suspension, speak to your GP, epilepsy nurse or epilepsy specialist.
-
Diazepam RecTubes (rectal diazepam) are out of stock in the UK in the 5mg and 10mg doses. The maker of Diazepam RecTubes, Wockhardt, does not know when it will have them back in stock.

The 2.5mg Diazepam RecTubes are in stock.

5mg and 10mg rectal diazepam tubes are available from other manufacturers.
-
There has been a temporary disruption to the supply of some medicines made by Sanofi, including Epilim and Frisium. Sanofi has sent us the following statement:

“Following the implementation of a new IT system by our third-party logistics provider, Kuehne & Nagel, at their warehouse in Chapeltown, pharmacies in the UK will have experienced delays in the delivery of some Sanofi medicines.
-
Mylan is out of stock of its version of oxcarbazepine 300mg and 600mg tablets.

The 300mg tablets are due back in stock in the week beginning 12 August 2019.

The 600mg tablets are due back in stock in the week beginning 13 September 2019.

The 150mg tablets are currently in stock.

Other manufacturers’ versions of oxcarbazepine are available. If you have any concerns about taking a different version of your medicine, speak to your GP, epilepsy nurse or epilepsy specialist.
-
Epilim Chronosphere modified release 1,000mg granules are temporarily out of stock in the UK. This is due to an increase in demand. Sanofi expects to have them back in stock by mid-August 2019.

All other strengths of Epilim Chronosphere modified release granules are available. Other formulations of Epilim (sodium valproate) are also in stock.

Sanofi has advised that anyone with concerns about Epilim stock levels should speak to their pharmacist, who will be able to check stock levels in their area.
-
Sanofi have told us that their supply of Frisium (clobazam) 10mg tablets has been significantly reduced over the past 2 weeks. This is due to a temporary manufacturing disruption, coupled with changes to packaging.
-
Pfizer now expects Epanutin Infatabs will be back in stock in November 2019.

Original story March 26 2019: Pfizer, the makers of Epanutin (phenytoin), have told us there will be a temporary shortage of Epanutin 50mg Infatabs. They expect it will be out of stock from 1 May for a few weeks. They do not know the exact date when it will be back in stock.
-


Just a tiny selection - anyone on painkillers, CNS, epilepsy, mental health, anxiety, dementia - speak to your pharmacist or specialist now to find out the most up to date info.

If someone could forward this to CCG it'd be a big help as may apply to him but hopefully

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

In a bit of a rush so I'll post this and hopefully return a bit later.

Smoke in mirrors.
The only thing that has any legitimacy is the question asked on the ballot paper.

The question that appeared on ballot papers in the referendum under the Act was:


Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

with the responses to the question to be (to be marked with a single (X)):


Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

and in Welsh:


A ddylai'r Deyrnas Unedig aros yn aelod o'r Undeb Ewropeaidd neu adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd?

with the responses (to be marked with a single (X)):


Aros yn aelod o'r Undeb Ewropeaidd
Gadael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd

No mention of any sort of negotiated deal.

No Deal has never been a preferred option.
Every single person I know would much rather prefer a negotiated deal.
But No Deal had to be a bargaining tool and was many always felt that it would be better than a bad deal.
And sure as night follows day all we got offered was a very bad deal.

You see, for any sort of reasonable deal to be made It requires both parties to enter into negotiations on an equal footing and with an open and conciliatory mind set.
The EU has adopted a bullying and totally uncompromising approach whilst the UK's negotiating tactics under May lacked any sort of cohesive or thought out stand point.

The FACT is that we find ourselves in this sorry and farcical situation because people have refused to accept the democratic process and careerist and self-promoting politicians have viewed it as an opportunity for personal advancement.
In addition those same groups of people have used it as an opportunity to engage in primary school like party political antics and to either dilute or simply ignore democratic process.

a reply to: Freeborn

We are where we are, but -

The EU has adopted a bullying and totally uncompromising approach whilst the UK's negotiating tactics under May lacked any sort of cohesive or thought out stand point.

is more than a little disingenuous. 27 countries all have their own opinion on the basis in which another member state should leave as in what obligations it should meet as part of the process and it's only reasonable that they do so. What Johnson is now doing is refusing to meet any obligations and more worryingly pull back against the backstop with no viable alternative in place and then blame the EU - that sounds bullying and uncompromising, doesn't it?

We must leave to honour the referendum result. The reason we aren't going to leave with a deal is the continuity remain faction having done everything in thier power to side with the EU over the last 3 years. With the objective to either keep us effectively bound in while notionally leaving, or outright overturn the result. They are still at it even now.

The wonderful beauty of it all is this is going to result in a much harder brexit than if they had all just got with the programme and been sensible.

Oh well, too bad, never mind.

a reply to: uncommitted

.....is more than a little disingenuous.

No it most certainly is not.

disingenuous
adjective formal uk ​ /ˌdɪs.ɪnˈdʒen.ju.əs/ us ​ /ˌdɪs.ɪnˈdʒen.ju.əs/

 (of a person or their behaviour) slightly dishonest, or not speaking the complete truth:

It was disingenuous of her to claim she had no financial interest in the case.

Opposite
ingenuous formal

–Thesaurus: synonyms and related words

Sly & devious

artful
backdoor
calculating
calculation
conniving
conspiratorial
crafty
cunning
cunningly
devious
deviously
guile
legerdemain
Machiavellian
Machiavellianism
scheming
sneaky
tricky
underhand
wily

dictionary.cambridge.org...

I assure you, its none of them things but rather a personal opinion formed by watching, listening, reading etc the complete farce that has been Brexit from the moment Cameron announced the referendum to the unbelievable situation where we have that buffoon Johnson blustering and blundering about determined to make even more of a debacle of the most incredible # up in modern politics.

27 countries all have their own opinion on the basis in which another member state should leave as in what obligations it should meet as part of the process and it's only reasonable that they do so.

And what many of those alleged independent countries wish is being completely ignored by the EU which is determined to treat the UK as if it was a vanquished nation in some imaginary war.
It wants Brexit to be as painful and punitive as possible in order to deter other nation states not to seek The Right to Self-Determination.

What Johnson is now doing is refusing to meet any obligations and more worryingly pull back against the backstop with no viable alternative in place and then blame the EU - that sounds bullying and uncompromising, doesn't it?

To any action there is an opposite and equal reaction.
It was inevitable that anyone who had anything resembling a pair of balls and some self-respect would react in some sort of similar manner to the EU's dictatorial approach.

a reply to: Freeborn

No Deal has never been a preferred option.
Every single person I know would much rather prefer a negotiated deal.

I 100% agree with you on this.

And sure as night follows day all we got offered was a very bad deal.

And am with you on this....

You see, for any sort of reasonable deal to be made It requires both parties to enter into negotiations on an equal footing and with an open and conciliatory mind set.
The EU has adopted a bullying and totally uncompromising approach whilst the UK's negotiating tactics under May lacked any sort of cohesive or thought out stand point.

And I also agree with you on but what I would add though is that there is a rational behind the way the EU have negotiated. Now to be clear I am not saying this makes it okay or I support what they have done just that there is a explanation for why they have done it. Right or wrong, their view is simply that if they give the UK a good deal then other Eurosceptic states within the EU will also look to leave. Now I don't know what went on in the negotiation rooms, I doubt anyone posting on ATS does no exactly what was said but I think its fair to say however those negotiations went, they landed us a pretty crap deal.

The FACT is that we find ourselves in this sorry and farcical situation because people have refused to accept the democratic process and careerist and self-promoting politicians have viewed it as an opportunity for personal advancement.

This is where I start to disagree with you a little bit, I think honestly part of the problem is that the challenges of Brexit have been massively underestimated and thats a big part of it. Both main political parties have said they would accept the vote and we have long had a eurosceptic government in power and even the leader of the opposition is a eurosceptic.

Part of me actually thinks that this was always an inevitability, that there never actually could be a meaningful deal with the EU, as the VoteLeave group said there would be, I think its possible thats its just simply not possible. At least with the kind of separation the UK government was going for, where it a "softer" Brexit then a deal could have been struck but I don't think it would have silenced the hardline eurosceptics.

In addition those same groups of people have used it as an opportunity to engage in primary school like party political antics and to either dilute or simply ignore democratic process.

I think its fair to say that there has been a lot political putting their own careers before the best interests of the country.

I always like discussing this with you Freeborn, its interesting how we have racially different views yet can still find some common ground so thanks for posting, while I might disagree with you on some aspects I do find your thoughts interesting.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: YouSir

it is very clear on the VoteLeave website that they are saying a deal would be negotiated they even say a new UK/EU treaty would be in place by May 2020.

I don't quite get how you can read the OP and not get that?

See that's the thing (still on page one so maybe somebody addressed this already). Just because you negotiate something, does not mean you will get it. I can negotiate with France to buy the Eiffel tower, that does not mean I will succeed in those negotiations. So it was very gullible of the brexit crowd to assume, GB will get a deal. Sure they tried to get one and entered into negotiations, but sadly the EU does not care for the terms that were presented, and is not in obligation to make a deal happen. See the reasoning here ? It was never a done deal to begin with, just empty promises for gullible people for political gain.

a reply to: Thill

Let me just clarify,

The point I was making is that I often read or here about people saying words to the effect of "Well there was no mention of a deal when we voted for Brexit so why are we bothering with a deal?"

The point of this thread is to demonstrate that is untrue, VoteLeave campaigned with the message that they would negotiate a deal and a UK/EU treaty would be in place by 2020.

I am not saying that I expected them to keep this promise of a deal just that they said we would have a deal deal.

To be honest, I did want and thought we could get a free trade deal with the EU. It makes sense for the UK and for the EU but I just didn't realise how entrenched the EU has become now.

The EU are happy to see their citizens suffer with higher costs for goods and potential job loses just to save their political dream of a United States of Europe. The EU is more important to them than their own citizens and national interests.

Also I don't care what Vote Leave said. I didn't follow them as they are a bunch of clowns and they couldn't be trusted (NHS Brexit bus comes to mind). FYI, I followed and supported Grassroots Out.

I would also like to add that if you read the governments £9 million leaflet they sent to every household, it stated and I quote... "Remaining inside the EU guarantees our full access to its single market. By contrast, leaving creates uncertainty and risk", "Losing our full access to the EU’s single market would make exporting to Europe harder and increase costs", "The government judges it could result in 10 years or more of uncertainty as the UK unpicks our relationship with the EU and renegotiates new arrangements with the EU and over 50 other countries around the world"

That sounds like there wasn't going to be a deal, yet we still voted to LEAVE...

What do you say about that?

I appreciate what you're saying. But a deal seems unlikely. So you gotta strip some things back to basics and get the hell out to appease the majority.

The UK voted leave and people are saying "the public didn't know what they were voting for" - they did.

Whatever was said during the leave campaign is worthless now - 3 years later. Times change and both sides have made it extremely difficult to get anything done because it's simply not what they wanted. Pathetic.

We need to leave. Deal or not.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Of course organisations that backed Brexit mentioned negotiating a deal during the build up to the referendum, but it wasn't a condition of the vote.
Never was it stated that a deal with the EU would be a requirement for the leave mandate.

Sure, we've been let down - by people and for reasons outlined earlier - but it need not be the nightmare scenario scaremongers are predicting.

Instead of wallowing in the portends of doom and gloom if people, - politicians and business people, bankers etc included, - united in a positive, progressive manner setting aside petty differences and worked together to overcome the issues that might face us in the near and immediate future we may be able to move forward to make a brighter long term future that we ALL can be proud of.

Brexit should have been viewed as an opportunity to drive through real change.....but no, let's concentrate on the negatives, the divisive nature of party politics, embittered notions of separatism and re-enforcing the status quo along with all its existing social inequalities and injustices.

originally posted by: 83Liberty
To be honest, I did want and thought we could get a free trade deal with the EU. It makes sense for the UK and for the EU but I just didn't realise how entrenched the EU has become now.

With a single market of 500 million people to sell to the EU is never going to be over concerned by a peripheral island that has always been a thorn in their side from day one. In addition to which as soon as we leave they will be adding replacement population something like western Ukraine etc to sell too. In addition the Germans have already seen their exports go through the roof by selling to China's billion and half consumers. In the real world of big players I'm sorry but the UK on its own a sideline issue and an awkward rock stuck put in the sea. The EU with their single market, China, USA and India are all that count in reality to those in Brussels

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Thill

Let me just clarify,

The point I was making is that I often read or here about people saying words to the effect of "Well there was no mention of a deal when we voted for Brexit so why are we bothering with a deal?"

The point of this thread is to demonstrate that is untrue, VoteLeave campaigned with the message that they would negotiate a deal and a UK/EU treaty would be in place by 2020.

I am not saying that I expected them to keep this promise of a deal just that they said we would have a deal deal.

Who is this VoteLeave? Is he a politician or is it a propaganda website? Why are you putting so much stock into this website?