Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Are those two the ones who has all the saying in EU?

When I speak with normal Swedes or Danes they seem to think Britain should be treated fair.

Normally one does not punish a winner even if one was not for it.

“There are people who are threatening to try and stop Brexit. The bottom line is that there is nothing that could possibly be allowed to stand in its way. Everyone in Europe is expecting it, the decision has been taken by the British people, and that’s it. Let’s get on with it.”

Theresa May is to meet her cabinet at Chequers after asking for each minister to report back on how they believe Britain can make a success of Brexit in their areas.

The meeting on Wednesday comes amid reports of a government split over whether or not the UK government should attempt to retain membership of the single market.

A number of senior figures, including the chancellor, Philip Hammond, according to the Sunday Times, are thought to believe that all options including staying part of the economic area should remain on the table.

But many Brexit campaigners, including the cabinet members David Davis and Liam Fox who will lead negotiations, are thought to believe Britain may have to quit the single market in order to impose adequate border controls.

Other European leaders have suggested the UK cannot keep full membership on economic and trade terms if it wants to restrict freedom of movement, arguing that is one of the four key principles of the entire project.

The issue is likely to cause tension within the cabinet, where most ministers campaigned to remain in the EU, but also more widely across government, with some Brexiters deeply suspicious of the motivations of pro-EU civil servants.

However a Treasury source dismissed speculation of a cabinet split, arguing there was no difference in the position taken. “Everyone agrees there have to be controls on immigration and some access to the single market – taking a flexible approach,” he said.
[...]
However, politicians, who campaigned overwhelmingly for Britain to stay in the EU, want to have a say on the deal the UK government secures.
[...]

German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel said on Sunday that if Britain's exit from the European Union was badly handled and other countries followed its lead, Europe would go "down the drain".

"Brexit is bad but it won't hurt us as much economically as some fear - it's more of a psychological problem and it's a huge problem politically," he told a news conference, noting that the world was now looking at Europe as an unstable continent.

"If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we'll be in deep trouble so now we need to make sure that we don't allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility," he said.

we don't allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility," he said.

As you correctly pointed out there is a difference in UK and GB I would like to point out there is a differnce between EU and Europe.

Unbelievable Daily Mail got it right

Mr Gabriel said: ‘Brexit is bad but it won’t hurt us as much economically as some fear – it’s more of a psychological problem and it’s a huge problem politically.

‘If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we’ll be in deep trouble so now we need to make sure we don’t allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility.’

The economic complexities of Brexit pale in comparison to the psychological ones, it sometimes seems, and in the response to German vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel’s remarks yesterday on the consequences of Britain’s decision, we have another case in point. Gabriel, a compelling political figure recently notable for giving the finger to a bunch of neo-Nazis, was reflecting on Europe’s likely response to British manoeuvres, and said something that you might imagine would be self-evident to most people: “If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we’ll be in deep trouble, so now we need to make sure that we don’t allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility.”

Which is just obvious, isn’t it? Depressing, but obvious. And yet in all the Faragiste scoffing at the idea that the EU will take a hard line in trade negotiations – you’ll recall a lot of talk of apoplectic German car manufacturers – the rational case for a punitive approach barely makes an appearance. It bears repeating: in the next couple of years, it seems likely there will be courses of action available to EU states that will be against their own immediate and narrow self-interest as well as Britain’s. It will appear superficially vindictive and foolish to take them.

Despite all this, whenever an influential European implies that the EU will not be going out of its way to make our exit a painless one, the howl goes up, on the front of the Express and elsewhere – the sound of a furious neighbour with an acute and unjustified sense of victimhood. Fine, we drove our car into their conservatory, but why won’t they go halves on the repairs? We’ve known them for years! Mates’ rates! It’s hard to understand how the same sort of people who have been hurling abuse at European leaders for months and years (“Virtually none of you have ever done a proper job in your lives!”) are now offended that those same European leaders don’t have their best interests at heart.

The only thing I can think of is this: when you’ve been part of a club for a long time, it is rather hurtful to realise that all of the benefits that you thought were just because everyone thought you were so great were actually because you were giving them money. We might have decided we don’t want to be part of the EU any more – but we have barely begun to come to terms with what that actually means. For now, the Brexiteers’ touching education in the impermanence of relationships continues. No one tell them the mother dies in Bambi, for God’s sake. They’re not ready.

We might have decided we don’t want to be part of the EU any more – but we have barely begun to come to terms with what that actually means. For now, the Brexiteers’ touching education in the impermanence of relationships continues. No one tell them the mother dies in Bambi, for God’s sake. They’re not ready.

Britain voted for Brexit without a plan and the Europeans intend to shaft us.

Chancellor Philip Hammond is said to want “partial” single market access, to keep the City’s passporting arrangements into the eurozone. If, in order to get it, Britain has to soft-pedal on immigration controls, that would be no disaster for the Treasury, whose growth projections in this year’s budget relied on the impact of a million EU migrants over the next five years.

Brexit minister David Davis and international trade secretary Liam Fox are chomping at the bit to begin the article 50 process – naturally they have drawn up rival timelines – but have so far failed to produce any kind of blueprint for their preferred outcome, which is to quit the single market and end free movement. This leaves May struggling to assert control over the process of even coming to a negotiating strategy – hence Wednesday’s away day – and in severe danger of floundering once she has to deliver her Brexit plan to the other EU heads of government.

It is a real, serious and material split in the government of a major country. And it is backed by rival forces in society. Those for whom Brexit became a religion in the spring of 2016 do not care about the niceties of the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Area. They voted to leave all of it and to “take control” of migration. But the economic elite of Britain, which has the strongest voice both in the Conservative high echelons and in the civil service, simply does not want Brexit. Above all it wants to maintain market access for the City, and for the major global service firms headquartered in London. For them, it is logical to hope that Europe stonewalls all May’s requests for flexible market access, and that – by the end of the process, and with the economy suffering – the public will be ready to accept staying in the EU, with some minor variations on migration.

Both main parties, then, are trapped between what is possible and what the British people voted for.

May wants to serve a full term. But both logic and principle dictate that were she to give in to the “clean break” brigade within the cabinet, she would have to schedule an election and fight for a mandate to lead Britain into this particularly stupid form of economic suicide.

But if Tories want go into an election promising to destroy 30 years of European financial integration in order to assuage the xenophobes and climate deniers of Ukip, that would be a different prospect.

the economic elite of Britain, which has the strongest voice both in the Conservative high echelons and in the civil service, simply does not want Brexit.