Now I know you can't deal with reality! Norway is the 10th highest contributor to the EU budget, there are 28 members of the EU and Norway isn't a member of the EU!

When you take into account a population of less than that of Scotland this ideological position of we will do super deals outside of the EU doesn't stand up to any close examination.

Britain now has to be steered to a position outside of the EU and when this Norway style arrangement is touted by you and criticised in any way you want to ignore it and say let's move on.

It's called being in the EEA.

Norway pays heaps of $$$ and doesn't even have full access to the market. Nor does it have any say when it comes to the drafting of EU laws (not a bad thing overall, but it cannot push for legislation that benefits its industries).

And it has to maintain the free flow of people.

Again a non-issue in our case (except for the braindead Farage sect) since most migrants to the UK are from outside the EU, and EU migrants themselves are the most beneficial to our economy.

At the end of the day, this whole Brexit thing is a farce. We all now know that leaving would be a mistake and staying in the EU is ultimately beneficial to Britain, so why all the fuss?

That sort-of assumes that there will be an EU in which to stay.
Such assumption is not very safe (for very long).
Major elections next year (2017).

Norway would get about a 1% share of voting pull in the EU anyway. What's the point. No benefit. Easier just to flick a small amount of charity money to be part of the free market and prop up the likes of Greece.

If you want to focus on what could have been, focus on the past, go for it.

Britain has been dealt its hand, its time to work with it. There are plenty of deals to be had inside and outside the EU.

There's a good chance there won't be an EU before long once the people of France and Germany have their say. Scotland can hook up with Ireland and Greece and have some fun with that.

No one is fussing. We were having a conversation about moving forward, rather than the past, before you and Oz Tennis started head hunting the Brexit movement ....... again.

People have been calling the end of the world for like forever. Similar story with calling the end of the EU... or the US... etc. Funnily enough the chances that the UK will end are much higher yet all talk seems to omit the more obvious scenario.

What exactly was the point of the gullible masses who want(ed) to leave the EU? And what is the benefit of just being in the EEA (like Norway) over being a fully-fledged member of the EU?

If you really think the gov't are silly enough to invoke Article 50 then you should be cashing in all your investments/holdings in Pounds and moving to safer grounds. Because if a simple, non-binding referendum sends a currency from $1.50 to $1.30, then actually pushing the economic self-destruct button could send the Pound below parity with the Dollar.

Hopefully we won't have to learn the hard way what an idiotic mistake this whole Brexit idea is. My bet is that years will pass, nothing will change, and by then another referendum will be needed as the old one will no longer be a valid...

Maybe .... but still need to go and find those trade deals before hitting the Article 50... or not as the case may be.

It has at least exposed near enough all big name politicians as wholly under-qualified and unwilling to run their own country. All too easy to shout from the bench/Newspaper/Couch at how shit the government is and how the country would best be run. Watch the slimy ****ers run for the hills when they get the chance to put their money where their mouth is. The whole point of the working class Brexit vote was 'ignore this then you ponces!!!' and who can blame them?

Yep. .... and its not just happening in Britain. Look at the US (Trump), Australia (Hanson's re-rise and Lambie). You watch the French and the Germans head that way too.

As the remainders call them, "the ignorant", ...... well they are rising up. They may we be ignorant to the points of views of the remainders, but they have a voice in a democracy. .... and a majority voice equals consequences.

Ireland was, and will remain, a member state of the EU however.



The much touted Norway/Iceland/Switzerland 'solution' - something of a cornerstone of the Leave campaign - still requires membership of the EEA. However it looks much like this baby is also going to be thrown out with the bath water.

I'd be quite happy to see UK withdraw from the EU, but maintain EEA membership - However it seems very much like EEA is also going to be on the chopping block as well, despite not having even been offered as an option in the referendum.


S

Hmmm, you turn having to be the 10th biggest contributor despite not being a member with no vote and having to follow EU rules into an advantage. No comment at all on the estimate that if Britain was in the single market but out of the EU its budget contribution will be 94% of the current figure.

At least at the moment the UK does have a veto over many of the rules the EU wants to introduce, and with not being part of the Euro it does not have to bail other countries out. It also has special powers not to introduce some of the legislation that other countries have to, so it does have much more autonomy in the EU than any other member.

That's because you and your source are dealing with estimates

The thinktank Open Europe estimates that the UK would pay 94% of its current costs

If you want me to play, deal with facts.

For what its worth, I'm not a leaver, but I don't see the point of dwelling on the past.

If Norway choose to spend a truck load of money so they can afford to have access to the single market, they obviously see the benefit.

How can you say how much the contribution IS going to be before the terms of the Brexit have been negotiated? i.e. you can only estimate.

If Norway spent a truck load of money to be part of the EU then you wonder why did Britain leave the EU? Water under the bridge as you say. I just feel whatever trade deals are put in place (if it is outside of the single market) cannot be superior in any way to what Britain already had with half of all it's trade with the other 27. If Britain pushes for single market inclusion then it comes at a cost as Norway illustrates.

By all means just pick and choose the bits of the EU you like (single market) to avoid the bits you don't like (free movement of people) but as Norway illustrates you don't get single market access for nothing. You have to contribute to the budget, you have to follow EU rules still and you don't get a vote on anything. I don't remember Johnson/Farage/Gove ever mentioning this in the lead up to the vote as they successfully sold a pig in a poke.

The big question remaining is whether the flow of immigrants, especially from non-EU countries, which so many older and more southerly voters are frightened of is going to significantly fall. Theresa May was pressed for a number in PMQ's and she came up with something like 'I'd like to get it below 100K p.a. but it won't happen overnight.

I agree, plus I think we should factor in that Norway was in a better position because it was negotiating from a free-standing stance, whereas the UK needs to trigger an ejection-seat mechanism and then it's all about alarm bells/SOS/Mayday or else we're left with nothing.

Personally I think the UK should never have been allowed any special perks or rebates or anything like that. This has instilled a type of small brat mentality in our politics, where our politicians have grown to believe that in this great European family we can be the youngest child that can get away with practically everything, whereas everyone else is held to account at a much higher standard.

As for the EEA and Norway's status, it's all about:

- paying big $$$

- having to wholly adopt the principle of free movement of people

- having no say in terms of EU legislation

- having to fully comply with the aforementioned legislation

- gaining access to the market but NOT full access in any way, looking at Norway's industries its access is actually severely hindered by not being a full member of the EU

I really don't get how people linked non-EU immigration to... being in the EU. Over 50% of migration to the UK is from outside the EU - so the UK is 100% in control of that - yet the gullible folk out there believe that... the EU is to blame. I mean like seriously? Plus we're not part of the Schengen agreement, so we get to check everyone trying to enter through our front door.

If anyone wants to influence migration then they should look at the clowns running our nation and ask them why they're deflecting blame at the EU even though they are in control over the majority of immigrants who come here each year (who happen to be from outside the EU). To me it seems like a case of repeating a lie a 1000x times until people believe that it's actually true...