Posted: Jun 15, 2017 4:04 pm
by fisherman
Matt_B wrote:
fisherman wrote:Is there such a thing as a bad compromise in this situation? If there is, it is difficult to see how EEA would be it. :dunno:

It's a bad compromise because it has both leavers and remainers giving up things that they want without either of them gaining anything they'd consider of value over the status quo. Basically, it's giving up all the power and influence the UK has in the EU for the sake of people who don't think the UK has any of either to begin with.

Of course, with the actual middle ground unachievable - because of the inextricable link between free trade and freedom of movement - it keeps getting put forth as the next best thing. That doesn't change what it is though.

I'm not sure I agree.

The status quo i.e. remaining in the EU, is unacceptable to those who chose leave and carried the referendum, the EEA separates the UK from EU and any further political union is stopped dead, with a repatriation of sovereignty for trade (external), agriculture and fisheries. For those who wanted to remain in the EU, the EEA allows UK to stay in the single market with freedom of movement and the avoidance of a destructive cliff edge exit.
That's real tangible benefits for both sides.

Compromise is necessary for the good of the UK now and this one would get the support of all Westminster political parties.