How to Get the Best from Brexit with Daniel Hannan
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 чер 2024
- Recorded on June 22, 2018
Will the United Kingdom really follow through on Brexit? British politician Daniel Hannan believes that Brexit is happening and cannot come soon enough. As a staunch proponent for the “Vote Leave” side, Daniel Hannan has been ready for Brexit since the referendum vote in 2016. He sits down with Peter Robinson to chat about what Brexit means for the UK, how soon it’s coming, and the likelihood of compromise between the now polarized British parties.
The United Kingdom became a member of the European Union in 1973. In June 2016, in a close 52 to 48 vote, UK citizens voted to leave the EU. Two years later and the UK is less than a year away from their deadline to leave by March 2019. Guest Daniel Hannan explains that while Brexit will ultimately be a good thing for the UK, arguments in Parliament have dragged out the question of if Brexit will happen, even though it’s already been settled by a referendum. Hannan argues that polarization amongst parliamentary parties is preventing real negotiations from taking place that will allow the UK to find the best compromise and regain their voting powers that citizens feel were diminished by membership in the EU. Hannan explains where the Brexit process is at in Parliament and what he feels is the best course of action for the EU moving forward.
About the Guest:
Daniel Hannan is a British writer, journalist, and politician. Since 1999, he has been a Conservative Member of the European Parliament for South East England. He is the founding president for the Initiative on Free Trade. His most recent book is What Next: How to Get the Best from Brexit.
For the full transcript go to
www.hoover.org/research/how-g...
Interested in exclusive Uncommon Knowledge content? Check out Uncommon Knowledge on social media!
Facebook: / uncknowledge
Twitter: / uncknowledge
Instagram: / uncommon_knowledge_show
To be pedantic, the UK joined the EEC in 1973, the EU was subsequently formed in 1992/3 after the Maastricht treaty and the UK electorate did not get a say on it.
Mr Robinson I find your interviews very enlightening in fact you conduct the interviews in a way that the general public can follow you thank you
peter definitely
Why is concern about immigration racist? We cannot cope with the numbers coming here and don't have the housing, NHS places or schools. We shouldn't accept low skilled workers that are reliant on welfare as that's undercutting the existing workforce.
Agree. The money people love the numbers rising, that includes the population. The general population though have realised that the UKs infrastructure has been declined to a level that is not able to cope with a higher population. It’s irrelevant if these people are bringing skills for business, because businesses are not realistically increasing the wealth or living standards of most of the UK. The wealth is mostly in London or being filtered to other wealthy cities. The man in the street gains nothing from the UK population increase, skill based pr not.
It is nice to hear an optimist, instead the doom and gloom of pessimism that is being heard.
Its a breath of fresh air to listen to a reasoned and logical debate.
Thank you
UK please take note.
Daniel Hannan is a true English gentleman in every meaning of that term.
Thank you for covering this topic. That was a great discussion.
Daniel Hannan is a highly intelligent and astute man, I really wouldn't be surprised if he is a future Prime Minister.
Always thought so .... he should toss his hat into the ring and No. 10 is his
You would really vote for a bloke openly advocating against worker rights?
The UK is strange?
A UK politian explaining to an US interviever "we both know that modern technology has made any kind of border infrastructre obsolete, right?" Yeah, right! And the interviewer did not even follow this one up with a remark or question....that is beyond words.
OdiumDei2 "that is beyond words." - And yet, it is to be expected, is it not? How else would Brexiteers defend the indefensible, if not by carefully orchestrated rhetoric to appeal to those seeking the sweet taste of confirmation bias?
This was, in my opinion, one of the weakest interviews of all time... Not sure what purpose the interviewer even served. Sock puppet, perhaps?
This is a brilliant interview,so well explained.
Great interview!
He's certainly an eloquent individual.
11/10
This talk is leaving out the key issue. The EU has said from the beginning that it will NEVER negotiate the common market - either you are in or you are out. It is the crown jewel of the EU and it would be unfair to all other member states if the UK got to be member of the common market on special rules.
Lars Larsen Exactly right. Finally, a grown-up! ;-)
Peter Robinson Great job as always!
Great chat, thank you
Thank you Daniel Hannan and thank you Hoover Institute for shedding some light on all of this.
Leave the EU to get the best out of Brexit.
Is there a good argument why Daniel Hannan wasn't plugin in in the whole Brexit negotiations? In my eyes he would have made a better outcome and a faster one than we can see now. - He isn't the only one, but looking back I also tought differently to Theresa May.
Don't be misled. The 'compromise' which he is supporting in this video is one in which we accept rulings from the European Court of Justice, accept regulation from the EU with no representation and spend vast quantities of money collecting tariffs for good passing through the UK to the EU. And this is the starting point of negotiations, after which the concessions would probably include freedom of movement. This 'compromise' is a total capitulation to the European Union and would leave us a vassal state. Daniel Hannan has spent decades supporting an exit from the EU and now supports this - to be honest it's a bit weird. Don't worry though, actual brexiteers with more integrity than Daniel Hannan made sure it couldn't get through parliament.
The actual answer to your question is because he is a peripheral and unimportant figure in the conservative party. You'll note he isn't an MP but an MEP.
At 6 minutes Dan saying we should compromise is what has got us into this mess. That useless woman May has tried to find a middle ground with that Checkers deal and in the end nobody on either side is happy. One has to wonder whether this is all a plan just to sabotage the whole thing.
christopher cook couldn't agree more
Sadly since this (great) interview, weak and wobbly May has bent over for the EU and Johnson and Davis have resigned in protest.
If there's one thing even Trump knows it's that you don't go into a negotiation already making concessions, you go in demanding more than you even hope to get. May has been far too agreeable toward the EU and now they'll just water it down further. Barnier must be pissing himself with glee.
It would have been even higher than 54% but project fear put a lot of people off voting to leave because they believed what they were told that there would be dire consequences for the country.
Africa is already preparing emergency supplies for the UK
Now wait wait wait, would he be okay with Brussels okaying drugs for UKers or not? But why does he OK the US to dictate that? Is there any principle behind all this?
No, they are not. They are not on a level playing field. For example, in terms of voting power, look at the Council of Ministers. Almost all decision making at a Council of Ministers session is made almost entirely by qualified majority voting. The UK has 29 votes in this system, whereas Malta has 3. Therefore, per head of the Maltese population, they have 15 times more influence in the Council of Ministers than the UK. In the European Parliament, Malta has ten times the influence of the UK. This is why it has been described as a gerrymandered system. How exactly is this a level playing field? The UK rarely ever successfully challenges something at the EU level.
You are also full of crap about Daniel Hannan's position. Most of the quotes attributed to him on the Single Market come from 2014 when David Cameron was trying to negotiate a new deal with the EU ahead of a referendum. Hannan had pointed out many times that some arrangements could be made that make it more favorable for the UK to stay in the Single Market. However, those arrangements weren't made. I'll give you one example. One of the biggest issues with the Single Market for Brits is free movement, as the numbers that actually used it to move to the UK were dramatically higher than the Labour government said. The labor government said 13,000 after the eastward expansion in 2004, within three years the estimate was off by a MILLION. This has caused all kinds of public services pressures on the NHS, school places and indeed housing, which is a shambles in the UK due almost entirely to immigration being so high. Hannan has pointed out that Liechtenstein because of its size has an arrangement where it is part of the single market but has an inward migration quota. That is, it can CONTROL immigration from the EU. However, the EU didn't want to offer to make such an arrangement with the UK.
When Hannan saw the abysmal deal Cameron came back from the EU with, he campaigned from then on for total Brexit. He was correct that the Single Market was not viable anymore as it didn't address the public's concerns and also because Britain would still have to apply the regulatory standards of the single market to businesses in the UK who don't even export outside of the borders of the UK. For the record, he has never EVER been in favor of staying in the Customs' Union.
He absolutely does not want a pre-1945 model, that's an absolute lie. He is a full supporter of the international institutions that have arisen since, including NATO which keeps many European countries in a security pact and has fuck all to do with the EU. He has no issue with cooperating with the EU on security, and always called for either a free trade deal with the EU like the Canada deal or that the UK joins the EFTA. It is the EU that is trying desperately to keep the UK under the EU's regulatory control, under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and inside a Customs' Union to prevent it from signing any comprehensive trade deal with anyone else. Ask yourself.. WHY? Why is the EU is desperate to do this? Because the answer is simple.. it will work. The UK economy is the second largest in the EU it does not depend on it like some. It could sign a trade deal with the U.S. rather easily outside the customs' union, and then follow it with India, Australia, NZ and is already set to continue trading with any nation the EU has a deal with on the same terms after brexit.. so South Korea, Canada etc.
It also can set its own tariffs against third countries, meaning it can reduce tariffs all the way to zero if wished. This would dramatically low the price of clothing and food, as well as drop import costs for businesses in the UK. It would no longer be subject to regulations that push out agricultural exports from North America, down South and beyond. Basically, all of the regulations made by the EU that block or severely limit imports from outside the EU in order to protect businesses primarily on the continent form competition would no longer apply in the UK.
The UK has a massive opportunity from Brexit as long as it is done properly, and you can see in every move from the EU how it is trying to tie the UK's hands post-Brexit so it doesn't demonstrate that opportunity to other countries, like Spain, Greece, Italy, Denmark and others that have growing Euroscepticism.
He didn't say he would be okay with the US dictating anything at any point.
Because they're not governing it, and it would be on a case-by-case basis (per trade deal) with an unforced, free decision by the parliament. As opposed to the current indiscriminate EU-mandated laws that forcibly dictate terms - and if you don't agree you can take it to the ECJ - where running a case is extremely expensive and the judge and jury are definitely not a non-partisan (in other words, if the UK disagree they can go f*** themselves)...
Very god interview . I do believe that before the vote to leave the EU. David Cameron gave a public TV speech to the UK regarding the implications involved in leaving the EU after there had been many negotiations which he had worked hard on implementing to the likes of our border controls and many other issues. Since the vote took place there had not been enough education and information on exactly how the EU works.......in relevance to our position ........Political education and awareness is a big part of the problem regarding the position we are in now. Unfortunately it is only now that the UK public are starting to understand the political European system we are engaged in. Appreciation to Daniel for this broadcast ...........very informative.
Cameron didn't resign honourably at all. He resigned because he blocked brexit planning and knew things would get messy.
May has put forward a deal that keeps Britain in the Customs Union but in effect it will leave the UK outside of the decision making process when it comes to the laws governing trade within the Customs Union.
It seems that our 'leaders' have forgotten and abandoned we the people. On both sides. The sad part is I believe this will end in civil war. Whether we leave or stay, our 'leaders' have caused such a divide between the sides the outcome is now inevitable.
Dan needs to understand that you can't have a smooth exit from the EU. the EU are fascists and will not allow it. You need to leave the EU on WTO and trade from there. The EU are too unreasonable to deal with from the partnership POV. the EU must not be encouraged , because they are 'empire builders' not honest brokers.
The entire post 1991 global trade system will not survive as is. Changes in Europe is just a part of that big change to a more nationalistic future.
If you like having a direct information
ec.europa.eu/info/publications/preparing-withdrawal-united-kingdom-european-union-30-march-2019_en
Fascist.. how does that even make sense... you do realise only 10 countries including Somalia and sudan are under WTO rules.. do you even realise what you are saying 🙄
first one said EU is facist the next says its communist. nothing proves better people dont know nothing about what they are talking/writing about...
story of brexit, trump and so on....
We don't want FDA standard food at all costs
Daniel Hannan once again brilliant
On the issue of referendum being "advisory" the argument that Parliament is soveriegn is entirely correct. However Parliament passed into LEGISLATION the referendum bill which effectively transferred the soveriegn decision to the people...RES PUBLIUS. The result stands and for Parliament to arbitrarily ignore that would cause massive constitutional problems. Having said that only a fool would believe that there will be no constitutional repercussions far into the future.
No matter how small the majority, or how many people turned out to vote, democracy only counts the result of those that turned out to vote. Britain operates on a first past the post electoral system. Even if there was only ONE more vote either way then that would be the winner.
I voted remain, I accepted the democratic result because I am a democrat. PARLIAMENT AND THE REST OF YOU SHOULD ALSO ACCEPT THE RESULT AND QUIT ALL THIS SOPHISTRY.
Overall really good interview really like Dan Hannan
It's just occurred to me that the (plausible) argument - which I don't happen to agree with - that the Referendum was purely 'advisory' can be COUNTERED with one very obvious Constitutional Convention. Namely, that:
In STRICT LEGAL terms, the Prime Minister 'advises' the Queen (the 'Queen-in-Parliament' being the source of our legislation), and Her Majesty signs off the relevant documents accordingly. That she is expected to do so is a matter, not of Law, but of Constitutional Convention - any breach of which could provoke a constitutional crisis.
Referendums are still innovatory in our constitution, but can we not ALSO argue - at least in THIS case - that since the People 'advised', by democratic majority, Government and Parliament to facilitate a DIVORCE fro the EU (not a Trial Separation), then THAT is what they MUST deliver ?
And it would be as unthinkable for them NOT to act upon that 'advice' as it would be for Her Majesty not to 'act' upon the 'advice' of her PM.
In addition, there is NO provision in the Referendum Act making it 'advisory only'.
Just a thought.........................
Daniel Hannan - it absolutely the UK's responsibility what happens regarding NI and RI border. And the idea that there will be NO border without an agreement between EU and UK is ridiculous - anyone who believes any country in the EU and their citizens will accept such an arrangement without the UK paying to have the free movement of goods is away with the fairies.
"the UK paying to have the free movement of goods"...
Keep this in mind when you hear the word democracy bandied about in the corridors of Brussels:
"Europe's nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually & irreversibly lead to federation"
Jean Monnet, Founding Father of the EU, written in a letter 30th April 1952
So now do you understand why the one country undefeated in WWII fighting for self determination wants out?
Easy to see why Hannon cannot get selected as a conservative MP candidate. With the exception of Rees Mogg no one in Westminster can hold a candle to him. Hope he stands as an independent in next UK election.
David Gifford people have a very short memory Hannan thought the NHS needed to be like the US system which is what Thatcher wanted .
I'm glad he's not an MP
He has some good thoughts about the EU but I don't want him anywhere near government power.
Lee B I would scrap the NHS completely....the Government has proved that they can't run a decent Educational & NHS system. I want it privatised
Lee B - He actually said the NHS had relatively low survival rates for cancers & strokes, a higher risk of becoming more ill in hospital, and constant waiting lists. And it was the Singapore healthcare system that he was advocating as a better model. Why shouldn’t the NHS be open to criticism and reform?
I normally enjoy Mr. Robinson's interviews, but here he continuously interrupts Mr. Hannan - often with a complete change of subject. Also, his questions are much more "leading" than usual. Otherwise, a good interview.
UK should leave the EU already. That's the beauty of the EU, you decide if you want to be in and you decide if you want to be out. But the British people should hold people like Daniel Hannan accountable if things turn out bad for Britain after Brexit.
"That's the beauty of the EU"... your forgetting the 'Agenda'. They will never permit the UK to leave intact.
We will be able to hold politicians accountable far more once we have full sovereignty.
shlon the citizens of the U.K. made the decision. We are the ones to be held accountable and happy we are to be so.
Why should politicians be held solely accountable when the majority voted for it? Politicians are supposed to be there to carry out the will of the people, rather than dictate what should or shouldn’t happen.
+Adam Uk The UK leaving the EU was already decided with article 50 procedure the thing that is going on now is making NEW trade deals for once they LEFT the union... UAnd the reason K will likely have to pay is because if they got a good deal thats to big an incentive for other countries to do the same which would be the end of the european union.
In other words your argument is bullshit since leaving the eu has already been agreed upon by both parties.
Every bilateral contract contains legal obligations superseding the national jurisdiction. And in case of a dispute, these are enforced with arbitration tribunals.
Does this mean Daniel Hannan will oppose any trade deal?
Poor UK!
The problem - or one of them - is that you have a conflict between plesbicitary democracy, i.e, the vote to leave the EU, and parliamentary democracy, i.e., having to carry out that withdrawal, complicated by a relatively close vote that is exacerbating matters. On the latter: I doubt that Parliament would be having these problems if the vote was 2-to-1 to leave. In all likelihood the makeup of Parliament would reflect that overwhelming desire to leave. So the details on withdrawal would be more easily worked out since the overall agreement to leave was higher.
The former point is more difficult. You have direct democracy and representative democracy at loggerheads. Imagine the US passing an amendment to balance the budget? That direct act would then have to be followed through by Congress with all of the interests trying to protect their programs and all of the "mechanisms" used by members of Congress to block legislation in play. What chaos!
Daniel Hannan finally gets to say his first word @02:05. This interviewer needs to learn how let a guest speak.
Good interview. Didn't know about the channel. Will watch more in future.
Long Live Brexit! Thank God that the UK is thinking.
India, Hong Kong, Ireland, Australia,... Understand the struggle :-)
The EU will not negotiate until after we have left without a negotiated agreement.
Peter we didn’t vote to leave by 4% it was 7.2%.
Hannan was very sharp. Robinson got off track with the national stereotypes. Continental Europe, especially Germany and France, has a tradition of more heavily centralized bureaucratically directed states and stronger state supervision of the economy. This conflicts with the less intrusive, more democratic, government of Britain and, certainly, the United States.
Roland Tours Hannan is very sharp ! Always worth listening to ?.
You never lived in Germany - it is a Federal country like the USA.
If Brexit turns out to be a disaster Scotland will likely vote to leave. After all during the campaign the English told the Scots not to vote to leave because if they did that would put them out of the EU.
Whatever is Legal in my Country is Legal in Yours & vice versa. No !
Britain always had its sovereignty when it was a member of the European Community. Reference to a statement that parliament made after the vote. A hard Brexit to be outside one of the largest trading zone is a disaster under WTO rules. A soft Brexit and we are servants to Brussels and thus everyone from vote leave to remain will be losers. It just makes sense to cancel Brexit and remain and exert British influence within Europe. After all we created the single market. Just remember, the USA could voice America's interest to Europe through Britain's membership. We acted as a bridge as useful partner. As result of Brexit this will no longer be. Perhaps you should get Ian Dunt from www.politics.co.uk . Good interview host if I may remark.
They both speaks perfect French but nevertheless the part about Charles de Gaulle should be improved.
Treason Mays negotiating position was very simple, she slackened her belt, bent over the desk and took it up the wrong un.
So answer this. In a general election, If the Conservative party got one vote more than the Communist party and a recount confirmed this, would there be another by-election? The same will go in other forms with the Labour party, the Lib Dems, and the Green party. Just one vote more than any other party would not constitute another general election nor a by-election. As for the referendum being informative that could have been the case. But, the elected government of the day led by PM Cameron made it absolutely clear it was a vote that would be adhered to. Not only that but PM Cameron by way of an information leaflet explaining the vote leave/remain, sent to every household in the United Kingdom, made it absolutely explicit what vote qualifying British citizens were voting for. The voter turn out I believe was an immense success of over 74%.
A word seems to have been cut in Peter's analysis of Italy at about 28:10 : "they'd rather have the central bank run by German than by ____"
a federal State not a single State!
If you had read The Great Deception by Richard North and Christopher Booker you knew EXACTLY why you voted to Leave.
This guy looks like a kids TV star - can't remember
Hannan seems to think its still 1918. The UK is not in a position of strength in 2018.
The UK will do much better leaving with a hard Brexit. The European project is doomed.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Space and what about flying anywhere once the planes are grounded?
Europe is doing great thanks .Now go away and leave us to prosper.
@Clark Kent You couldn't be more wrong. Switzerland singed a free trade agreement in 1972. They just made a few changes 20 years later, and agreed on that as well. Get your facts right please
The UK has no benefit from Brexit.
Just a show of hands.... who has been through a friendly divorce????
Not saying this is true but even if the referendum was tipped toward an out vote by a racist element, the result is still the result and the will of the people should be implemented. The people are what they are and should not be judged by those who think they know better.
Bravo Daniel Hannan ,one of the more eloquent Brexit "explainers" (along with Jacob Rees-Mogg) Peter seems to have a very good grasp of our European situation but i disagree with his German theories....consider that modern Germany came about by unifying about 17 independent states,via a common trading arrangement, the forerunner of the European union. Peter Hitchens has a "must see" YT video entitled,"The European Union,the continuation of Germany by other means" which delves into Germanys long history of expansionism. They supposedly lost the war,but seem to have won the peace,,,just 70 years later have the strongest economy in Europe & control the European central bank, oh and of course are now pushing for a new European army....food for thought.....
David Cameron & the Tory Party are a disgrace & have divided our country in two, I think Theresa May will be out by October & in all probability Boris Johnson will be P.M. Well at least he is a proper Brexiteer..(allegedly) !!...Then in November we have the mid-term elections,(referendum on Trump) ? in USA, exciting times folks, 2000 years of civilisation
tut tut !
It was always highly probable that the EU would play hardball. Compromise requires a confidence in the future that the EU does not possess.
9:30 Come on, Donald Trump also said "that's why we have Brexit in the first place, because of immigration". Would have been Brexiteer obviously
16:31
He's wrong about the Irish border, the technology does not exist to make border infrastructure irrelevant - otherwise they would be using it at every border crossing.
This all sounds very good - then along comes James O’Brien, Mandelson, Adonis, Blair and Co. who rubbish it all. But I’m liking the idea of Status Quo getting involved. I wonder which way they voted?
34:10
erm... isn't this exactly the sort of arrangement we currently have with the EU? Hannan here is just arguing for becoming a vassal state to the US. Well to that I say no thanks, I'd rather align our regulations with the EU (which has higher standards which is why the EU is resistant to a US trade deal) than open up Britain to American corporate interests.
I agreed with various things Hannan said in this interview: The inadequacy of the prime minister, the crucial point that what Brexit actually means is still all to play for (thanks freedom :)) but mainly the point that the whole process thusfar has been a clusterfuck of immature infighting, finger pointing and mudslinging. But part of the problem has been a failure for Leavers (and, in particular, the politicians in government who campaigned for it) to present a substantive, positive case for their vision of Brexit. But it's not the Remainers that are stopping them. What's stopping them is an unwillingness to face up to the consequence of Brexit, the tough decisions it will entail, and to take their share of responsibility
Hannan is a relatively smooth talker but he's a perfect example of this. After a whole interview talking around the subject (with a brief interlude spent ignoring the Irish border problem) the mask finally slips and he reveals that his vision of Brexit is turning our country into the USA's fucktoy. But he knows that this is massively unpopular, so he's just going to go back to talking about vague but indisputable ideals of sovereignty and "Britain making its way in the world!"
What should be clear after this two year circus is that while the referendum gave a mandate for leaving the EU, it was the fault of Remainer hubris to call the vote before any substantive details of what this would actually entail were even discussed. What's needed now is some real debate over what kind of Brexit we should have and, more importantly, what kind of country we want to become once we leave. Insisting on a #peoplesvote is the best way to force our leaders into action while resisting giving over the reigns of brexit to whatever apocalyptic death cult capital interests bankroll the likes of Mogg.
See also: ua-cam.com/video/0xGt3QmRSZY/v-deo.html
What a load of bollocks. Why would you align with an organisation that is destined to collapse through over regulation, authoritarianism, lack of accountability, I.e. communism in the making. The brexit we should have needs no debate. We voted to become an independent country full stop. That is what should be implemented first. Any trade deals come later. The public will not stand for any watered down version of brexit. The politicians might impose it but the public will un pick it one way or another through voting or violence.
The point I'm making is not that we'd be better off in the EU, or that we should Remain, but that we might be worse off if Brexit is done badly. So let's say we leave the EU like you want. My question is: then what? It remains to be seen whose interests Brexit will ultimately serve.
I also want to know what you think it means for Britain to be "independent". Reality check: we are not a superpower like the USA or China which have effectively a whole continent's worth of natural resources. We rely on being able to make mutually beneficial arrangements with other countries on trade (and defense) in order to compete with the best. But that means we will always be beholden to the terms of some agreement. The question is: what terms are we going to accept?
i've watched 100s of hours of brexit programmes but this one is without doubt the most informed i've seen.
i will completely disagree with him on one point though - the uk voted to brexit not on trade deals or rules and regulations dictated by brussels, it voted to close its borders. thats not a racist statement, i dont believe the uk is any more or less rascist than any other country on the planet, but the truth is we are just too small a country to support the number of immigrants that our insanely generous welfare system attracts.
and far too many people are talking like the eu is some magnificent spectacle that will shine like a beacon for centuries to come. well it won't......it won't even last a decade.
the second biggest political party in every single major eu country is now far right/anti eu. half of germany/france/holland/italy/sweden dont want to be in the eu, most of spain and probably all of greece. yes the uk will have it tougher for a couple of years but we will come through. it's not the size of the dog, its the size of the fight in the dog, and the one thing we are is a nation of fighters!
so when our borders close in 6 months time where the fuck do you think all those immigrants are going to go?
but the icing on the cake will be when turkey join the eu. there will be an exodus of people to western europe on a biblical scale. germany and france honestly wont know what the fuck has hit them, and that will see the end of the eu as we know it. it wont be governments that bring about the end of the eu it will be the people. the whole world is heading for a prolonged period of nationalism. it started with trump in america and brexit in the uk. i dont think it will end in a very good place.......
Great interview. Refreshing to see the interviewer pose clear and interesting points and not just go out to ambush the person. Also very balanced responses from Hannan who did not seem to just quote sound bites.
Interviewer. If you ask a question, let the person make the point, don't throw in another question.
We leave as voted that was out,if they don;t want to give us complete free doom ,we must stand our ground tell them where to ge t off and leave,I believe we will be lots better off.
Hannan's position on the 'theological attitude of Brussels bureuacrats that the UK must be punished' is just childish. What the UK is demanding from the EU is to have a better deal than any of the EU member states have, than any of the third countries with which the EU has an agreement on the single market or the customs union have:
The UK wants to have the same access to the EU's single market (on goods) as the member states have without abiding by the same rules and obligations. Switzerland basically has only the single market in goods, but to get that they have to adopt the EU regulations without an option of saying no (or all their deals will cease to apply) and they have to accept freedom of movement. But no, according to the UK, the rules that apply to others should not be for them. They are better than others, apparently.
The UK wants to take part in EU agencies and wants the EU to accept the permits issued by UK agencies -- even those that Norway and Switzerland do not participate in, even if they accept freedom of movement and fiscally contribute towards the maintenance of the single market. But no, according to the UK, the rules that apply to others should not be for them. Ask the US if they will give access to Canada to the databases of the FBI, the FDA, the EPA etc. without Canada abiding by US regulations and being under the US courts to what comes into enforcing the rules and data on those systems.
The UK wants to have access to the EU markets without customs procedures, even if Turkey, Norway and Switzerland -- all of whom abide by EU rules and Turkey even applying the EU external tariffs - but still have customs procedures. But no, according to the UK, the rules that apply to others should not be for them.They want the EU to allow UK producers to be able to charge 0% on Chinese steel and then to be able to sell their goods in the EU markets without rules of origin. Essentially creating a competitive advantage for UK companies. And they they think that the UK is being punished if it is not allowed to do this.
What a bunch of cry babies. -- And you are free to refute my account by facts. Until then, my assessment stands.
"Will there be life after Brexit". Watch this video by Birmingham University, a lecture by a British judge and legal expert. Politicians are tabloids in suits.
I think his father is Irish - not British
A trade team with the US could be fantastic. We should be working together to make space industry a reality. Steel made in zero gravity is 1000x stronger than that made on Earth. A pv generator could produce cheap and clean energy for long term cleaning of the planet. We need to solve our problems with the technology we have now before events overtake us.
Too short of an interview.
Just two points out of the many that occurred to me. 1 If GB leave the EU and want to stay within the WTO then they will be obliged to impose tariffs on the EU if they wabted to have tariffs on any other country in the WTO. 2. If GB wanted to negotiate a free trade deal with any other country after Brexit they would have to guarantee the integrity of their borders, including the border on the island of Ireland. Can't see the US going for the tech border pipe dream. Btw the US has already objected to GB's first attempts at renegotiating it's WTO membership. Hannan obviously knows these things, so he's willfully lying.
This is an easy question. Forget all about Brexit and stay in the world's largest free trade bloc.
Used to like Hanaman but he has gone soft
at the beginning i really enjoyed watching him. especially his argument with the lack of arguments on both sides is a fact (ok he is a leaver so he doesnt point out what kind of information war "his side" provided - just the example from the other side, which is also not exact - lots of the well known economic statements are focussing/focussed on the time about 1 year before the brexit, the brexit itself and the time after - it already shows a negative trend, but like he said brexit is more than just one issue. so its more than only jobs and economy...)
but as soon as he reached the point of Brussels "we want to punish you for leaving" part i doubt his arguments.
i have to assume a man in his position knows that the content of the single market is not negotiable for a different (outside) country. u can follow the rules or not. thats not revenge. its just the contracts within the eu countries. contracts which would had never taken place without uk's approval in the last decades. contracts which allows free trading agreements with other non-eu countries under some rules. and uk is now just "another country". so it gets the same agreements like other countries. but they know these contracts. they were part of it. they helped creating it. and now it seems they have never heart of it before. They are dreaming of a "More". and they cant get it. and they have no strategy what else now.
so he creates a backstabber story which puts the eu as the bad guy for everything. just as always for eu haters.
same as the irish border story (together with his border infrastructure argument)
its well known that this online customs clearance technology (regarding goods) is just an idea to keep uk in the tariff union without any problems. the technology is not invented yet. and above all you cant await some acquirable product in the next decade to adopt.
its already proved wrong and even uk's government noticed that. but he still points it out as a solution für 2019.
and btw. the refugee crisis was just a lie regarding brexit. UK was never part of "Schengen". so refugees cant just move in the uk - especially without being european citizens (which they arent obviously)
this was a media hoax by the british yellow press. among others.
in the end he seems like the typical right wing ideoligist with a brave knight image. the leave debate contained a lot of hate and lies to get the final votes to win. and he describes it as a vote for democracy....
obviously he wont face lots of problems caused by the brexit process. question is how about the others.
remember his claim in the beginning... he missed objective arguments on both sides. 30 minutes later he failed himself. he just provides a better performance to cover it.
Any body that is in two minds about whether to stay or leave the eu should take the time and trouble to watch this video from 2012. ua-cam.com/video/AZYcjVC2rRQ/v-deo.html It is not bullshit but facts. In essence it is that the war in Europe by Hitler and his gang, was not lost by the fascist and nazi contingent of the worlds population, But the eu is in fact a continuation of this process of conquer. When you know this and compare what it tells us and then compare with the likes of its leaders, everything becomes really, quite clear. It is also very frightening to begin to understand the type of people that we have in power in Westminster, it shows that they are highly and forcefully incompetent and corrupt, both as villains and traitors to this country and our constitution.
I am sure this man is smart but, the EU has no incentive to change. The U.K. wants all the good and none of the bad. The Tories can even agree on what their plan is going to be. The customs union is predicated on agreed standards. This idea that the UK can get trade deals with out a border is strange. Also the border can't be open for free travel. If the border was open in NI anyone can get into UK. He is talking with out anyone checking his facts. I am beginning to think he thinks he thinks the US will give up the control he wants is a pipe dream. If he thinks the UK market is better then the EU is really us off his rocker. Number don't lie the EU market dwarfs the UK. The fall will be fast and hard. But I am sure he has a safety net.
Resign if there's a queue to Dover. Support your speech with your future
Mr. Robinson, are you playing dumb here?
Hannan is from Peru.
It is all very easy. European industrialists moved their factories to cheap labor states in Asia. They must control the EU to guarantee access to the EU market. The industrialists self-protection mechanism has become exceptionally cut throat. The US faces the same situation. Compromise??? Why? They chose to become Asians at the detriment to European nations. But play nice and be kind. Tell that to the person who lost their lively hood.
In the interests of balance, the Hoover Institution should now interview someone like Andrew Adonis or Will Hutton who would give an entirely different perspective from the pro-EU side of the debate. Many of the statements from Daniel Hannah such as the N.Ireland border issue were factually inaccurate.This was not a balanced presentation of the Brexit issue in any shape or form.
It is sad to see how they blame the EU for all the bad. It will be good to see you leave, but unfortunately it will cost us and the UK a lot of money.
Any way of fact checking this?
For American readers, imagine a referendum in the U.S.A yes or no, make Trump president for life and his children there after and in doing so remove YOUR citizenship replacing it with subject status, that is 'subject to the will' of the president. 52% of Americans vote yes.
How would you feel about this?
This is basically what is happening in the U.K. British citizenship was only introduced in the 1980's to put us inline with the European democracies. It is in effect meaningless since it simply allows a British citizen to also be a British subject. A Subject to the Crown. Which is why your founding fathers fought the war of independence, remember? The longer Britain is/was a European member the more of a republic we were becoming. Our European citizenship will be removed.
Also, strangely, 48% - 52% is a2% difference, remove 2 from 52 and you have 50, add the 2 to 48 and you have 50. There is more of a difference in vote-margins in the UK if it rains on the day. The real result here is 38% of the population is dictating Brexit to 62% since about a third of the electorate didn't vote. Which is why democracies like the United States and Zimbabwe (go figure) require a super majority to change constitutional law.
Xenophobia is rife, Hannan is forgetting in an exit-poll survey it is unlikely a person will admit they are a racist. True there were many different reasons people voted to leave but xenophobia is widespread in England. There has been a massive increase in racial crimes reported since the referendum, the facts are available online.
Hannan also mentions sovereignty, This is a widely held misunderstanding. In the Brexit white paper published by the former Minister for Brexit David Davies, a hard-line Brexit advocate (naturally) it specifically states the British sovereignty has never been compromised by membership of the European Union. That's another fact if anyone is bothered to read the paper.
Here Hannan continues the Brexit campaign policy of misdirection and slight-of-hand. The Brexit campaign has been frequently accused of lying but that's 'mostly' incorrect. They just didn't tell the truth.
PLAN A
Why the Brexit ministers are leaving the sinking ship is because plan a fell apart when Trump shelved TPP and TTIP because they were expecting to leave the EU and sign up to a trade deal with the USA then get access to all the markets TTIP covered (including Europe).
I won't waffle on Plan B, suffice to say 2.3 billion commonwealth members couldn't give a damn about little England.
I'm convinced that Hannan is a progressive - of the left. Remember that the left gave up on economic change years ago and is now almost completely focused on cultural issues. You have the people that are really pushing these cultural, diversity and identity doctrines, and then you have the people getting swept along with the movement of the Overton window. Daniel Hannan falls into the second category. He's a very weak-minded individual who has been conditioned by the far-left to feel uncomfortable whenever the issue of immigration is brought up. He comes from the Blair, Cameron, Osborne and May stream within British politics. All of them progressives.
In reply to the suggestion that Brexit was all about immigration and xenophobia, Hannan responded by saying that most people voted because of the issue of sovereignty. So I guess if they had voted to leave due to the issue of immigration then he would presumably agree with those racist accusations. But he is fully aware that the issue of sovereignty was known by everyone to be a critical factor in controlling immigration numbers so he's flat-out lying.
What the hell?? Just leave with the same set of policy you had when in the EU and from that use you sovereignty to then democratically decide on what to change as this would be direct and simple. This hard/soft BS is nothing but a dumb story. It's real simple.
Briton - "I'm leaving, going to go see what is going on with me and myself and whatever, bye! Hey me! What is up with you? What you want to do this weekend? Any plans? Let's talk over a nice cup of tea."
EASY
When Hannan pretends that there is a straightforward solution to the Northern Ireland border issue; he is being deeply disingenuous. You can't have different tax laws and no border. As it is people from the Republic go to the North to fill up their petrol tanks. Yet, if a visible border is introduced; there could be violence. Putting the blame for what may happen inside the UK on the Republic of Ireland and Europe is simply ludicrous. Of course it's your responsibility Hannan.
I choose to fill my gas tank in New Jersey before I enter New York because of the different tax laws and I don't go through any border checkpoints and there is no violence.
je pa You're absolutely right. And of course in Europe in the Schengen area there are different tax laws and no borders. I think if we steel man what Ian P was trying to say he probably meant you can't have different customs rules and different quality control regulations and no border.
Still not convinced Daniel Hanna knows what he is talking about.. I am sure he is a very clever man but when it comes to Brexit questions remain...
run away like you did Hannan. You should be involved here and shaping and ensuring it happens, not clearing off as soon as the campaign is over. No respect
"Britain as a global nation then just a regional one" says Daniel Hannan at the end of the interview. And that is what "Brexit" is all about. England unable to come to terms with the fact that it lost being a world power and isn't even "first among equals" but just one of 28 European countries. Throwing the toys out of the pram in a pathetic effort to get noticed.
You don't need to be an empire to be global and project yourself globally. Little Europeans have this childish and delusional imperial EU dreams. "Pooling sovereignty" rather than having just a common economic project was never going to work because the governance cultures are massively different across Europe.
steenkigerrider keep telling yourself that
"Little Europeans have this childish and delusional imperial EU dreams." Well if that's the case they have this in common with the those zealots in England that proclaim that "Britain's best times are still ahead". ...." because the governance cultures are massively different" ?! ... Well that doesn't sound very optimistic with all those many muslim's in the UK demanding sharia law does it?
Britain has never been part of continental Europe, so it has always had a wider view of the world. It is ‘global’ in that sense. The British Empire was always about trade, never about power. As so many countries around the world have dropped their previous socialist & isolationist stances in favour of the free market, there has never been a better time for the UK to return to its natural global outlook, and depart from the protectionist and bureaucratic EU. Especially as the political Euro project will inevitably collapse at some point.
its ok, because we havnt left yet,these ieavers Iive in fairytail land
*Breaking News* 2nd August 2018. The Bank of England raises the interest rate to its highest since 2009, not because of heated economic growth but due to Sterling falling in value since Brexit. Bank of England has further warn that Brexit could damage the UK’s economic recovery. Meanwhile Daniel Hannan the Architect & defender of the sunny uplands of “Anglosphere Emplire2.0” is shifting the Brexit blame elsewhere on such interviews. The very idea of leaving the European community was just incredibly irresponsible and loony from the start.
No doubt about this: Brexit will result in the end of the United Kingdom (because perhaps N. Ireland and Scotland might decide to leave the U.K.) London, as the center of Insurance and Finance, will end. Anti-Britain feeling will rise in Europe, and many Europeans will avoid buying British goods. Rolls Royce engines on European Airbus? I don't think so. British exports to U.S.A., India, Australia, New Zealand? Maybe, but you have to build up your markets. They will never replace exports to Europe. And imports from Europe? Yes, they will continue. Good luck, Britain. At least, I hope that London theater will continue being great.
Hannan is a complete fantasist, just like the other Brexiteers
And I am sorry, but this who notion of 'the UK is not going to put up a border in Northern Ireland' is either wilfully ignorant or seriously ideological. If the UK was not to put up a border in Northern Ireland, how would it have any free trade agreements with anybody else in the world? How would they give better access to some countries than to others, if they did not control what comes through their border in Northern Ireland? Simples. They could not. The Most Favoured Nation clause under WTO requires a member to treat all other members the same as those that they do not have a legally registered free trade agreement or customs agreement with. If the UK decided not to enforce the trade over the Irish border without a legal agreement, they would have to open up their borders to everybody else. The EU is clearly not going to do any such thing.
However, bearing in mind that the Brexiteers are a bunch of radical free traders, they are saying this 'no border in Northern Ireland' as a part of their radical agenda of opening up the UK markets on 0% tariffs and zero regulatory checks to the rest of the world. This is the Patrick Minford plan of killing off UK manufacturing and swapping those jobs for jobs in UK financial services sector. Although, of course they are incapable of understanding that after they will have opened up UK borders to the rest of the world, the rest of the world is not going to play ball and give access to the UK financial services sector to their markets, because they can get the benefits of the UK markets without any sacrifice.
Because we are a net importer and net customer to the world. IF you are in business you don't go around telling your customer what they can and can't do. There will be no hard border in Ireland because there is no political will to do so from either of the sovereign powers either side, and certainly no money on the EU system. There isn't a single power on earth that either can change that, nor will they do so. Ireland will be fudged like it has been for a century.
Brexit is the triumph of practical politics over slavish adherence to rules.