Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Branton Rover on December 03, 2018, 06:57:46 pm
-
Just curious really
-
Branton,
What is the difference between option 2 and no 3?
-
This whole thing has just shown how poor our politicians are on both sides of the debate.
I would have a 2nd referendum.
This time let us just have facts and honesty from both sides and hopefully a good turn out.
I also think that Putin and Trump now look to have influenced more than they should since the vote.
-
Hard Brexit means getting a Trade Deal with EU & leaving all the institutions - No Deal means just that
-
At the very least, something without the arselicking US trade deals that will mean appalling food standards, toxins sprayed all over our farmland, more NHS privatisation with the US walzing in, and basically harm to us all.
-
This whole thing has just shown how poor our politicians are on both sides of the debate.
I would have a 2nd referendum.
This time let us just have facts and honesty from both sides and hopefully a good turn out.
I also think that Putin and Trump now look to have influenced more than they should since the vote.
Idler, I think that one of the reasons that we got little or no facts about what Brexit would entail when we voted in 2016 is that no one, including our politicians, really knew what was ahead of us.
I also wonder where we would be with regards to leaving if a second vote ended with another Leave outcome.
Wouldn’t we be in exactly the same place as we are now.
-
Maybe, but at least we would know where we stood, and what the vote actually meant..
This negotiated “deal” should have been arranged before the referendum then put to the public vote.!
-
The whole thing is a complete mess and I do not see the benefits of Brexit at all. I voted Remain, I would vote Remain again. Stupid to isolate ourselves for the sake of it and it really should cost the Tories the next election.
-
This whole thing has just shown how poor our politicians are on both sides of the debate.
I would have a 2nd referendum.
This time let us just have facts and honesty from both sides and hopefully a good turn out.
I also think that Putin and Trump now look to have influenced more than they should since the vote.
No second vote needed, already had a people's vote and 17 and a half million said out, there was not a deal or no deal on the paper just in or out and you all know the result
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
-
Is n’t a hard deal/clean break the same as a no deal?
-
As it currently stands, the preference of 36% of us is for there to be no snap in the shops come May next year.
-
This whole thing has just shown how poor our politicians are on both sides of the debate.
I would have a 2nd referendum.
This time let us just have facts and honesty from both sides and hopefully a good turn out.
I also think that Putin and Trump now look to have influenced more than they should since the vote.
No second vote needed, already had a people's vote and 17 and a half million said out, there was not a deal or no deal on the paper just in or out and you all know the result
So a vote with no clear definition of what the f**k you are voting for is a good idea.??
And before anyone labels me anything, the leave vote could potentially have been bigger with a clearer and agreed definition of brexit..
Is that too difficult to comprehend.?
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
-
As it currently stands, the preference of 36% of us is for there to be no snap in the shops come May next year.
And here we are going down the time tunnel !
Project fear rearing it ugly head
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
But when two years later it becomes clear that what you voted for isn’t actually what you’re getting, and then you can’t change things with another vote - like you can with a general election - how the f**k is that democratic.!
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
-
The most ignored leaving deal is Lexit. I am sick of being stuck with tags of association with "Tommy" Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon "Robinson" of EDL and UKIP infamy. No I wasn't too thick and therefore was taken in by phony immigration threats. I know the EU is not reformable and is a rich right wing club. Interestingly French train drivers are up in arms about plans to privatise SNCF as its all about market competition. We need a system where we can renationalise rail, water gas and electric - all popular with the public mood (train fares rising again in January to subsidise rail franchise profiteers- including the Dutch and German state railways). And if you think the EU protects workers rights you are dreaming back in the era of Delores, as consecutive UK, with no intervention from the EU, governments have eroded them further. We need to leave with the best deal possible for UK workers and rights.
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
David Davis disagrees. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-countries-democracy-brexit-vote-article-50-second-referendum-a7629636.html
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
Should that also apply in the House of Commons?
-
Project Fear. Or, as we used to call it, considered opinion arrived at by experts who spend their lives studying these matters, but who, apparently, don't know as much about the issues as Boomstick.
BS. When you go abroad, do you trust the aeronautical engineers who designed the plane, the pilots who fly it and the air traffic control professionals who direct it. Or do you strap a pair of feather-covered boards to your arms and flap them?
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
For f**ks sake man can you not see the point.!!
If we vote for a government that is later found to be unrepresentative of their manifesto, they can be voted out next time.. same with councils, and even Americans can oust Trump in a couple of years..
So why is it so wrong to expect a new vote for brexit, to vote on the ACTUAL Brexit.??
Why is that the only thing we can’t vote again for.??
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
I think think we should have a vote to see if we should have another vote, or is that not allowed because it might ruin your original vote? This is why people shouldn't be allowed to vote on the big shit...
-
If it's still the will of the people then why not make sure?
-
Project Fear. Or, as we used to call it, considered opinion arrived at by experts who spend their lives studying these matters, but who, apparently, don't know as much about the issues as Boomstick.
BS. When you go abroad, do you trust the aeronautical engineers who designed the plane, the pilots who fly it and the air traffic control professionals who direct it. Or do you strap a pair of feather-covered boards to your arms and flap them?
Project Fear. Or, as we used to call it, considered opinion arrived at by experts who spend their lives studying these matters, but who, apparently, don't know as much about the issues as Boomstick.
BS. When you go abroad, do you trust the aeronautical engineers who designed the plane, the pilots who fly it and the air traffic control professionals who direct it. Or do you strap a pair of feather-covered boards to your arms and flap them?
Ah, I can see your having one of your cantankerous episodes.
So I'll be nice, old lad.
So claiming there won't be food on in the shops isn't fear mongering? And isn't completely over the top bull shit?
Infact it comes across as clutching at straws.
-
Why don’t we get a chance to vote on this “deal”.?
-
What happens if a second vote is close again but goes to remain?
Do we have the best of three?
-
If it's still the will of the people then why not make sure?
The PM’s latest catchphrase, it’s a scandal she can’t apply the same phrase in the House of Commons and follow the vote to publish the whole legal advice the Government eas given
-
Why don’t we get a chance to vote on this “deal”.?
Why should we? I thought parliament was sovereign?
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
David Davis disagrees. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-countries-democracy-brexit-vote-article-50-second-referendum-a7629636.html
I don't give a flying chit what he says we voted out and the courts said there will be no second vote so what the flock has it got to do with him
-
remember when all the polls were remain......
-
What happens if a second vote is close again but goes to remain?
Do we have the best of three?
Go to penalties 5 random remainders selected and 5 leavers selected and so on if sudden death needed
-
2 and 3 are the same
-
What happens if a second vote is close again but goes to remain?
Do we have the best of three?
The vote should be do we accept brexit under the terms on offer.. if yes, fair dos, if not, then the government either needs to present a better deal or revisit brexit a few years hence, perhaps combined with a general election manifesto..
-
Can we have one that's says don't 90% of people are moaning and half voted to leave I'm not say the pm is right or wrong with the deal she has got but I can guarantee people will still moan
-
Can we have one that's says don't 90% of people are moaning and half voted to leave I'm not say the pm is right or wrong with the deal she has got but I can guarantee people will still moan
One for the punctuation police to have a look at lads.
-
I can't even work out what that sentence is meant to be saying tbh.
-
Shouldn’t this be off topic.?
-
Why don’t we get a chance to vote on this “deal”.?
Why should we? I thought parliament was sovereign?
Yes, I wonder why the PM won’t act on the Will of Parliament and publish the full legal advice?
-
Shouldn’t this be off topic.?
Totally agree lets bring it back to Rovers.
Will we be able to sign quality players from the EU like Van Nieustaddt and Priet ??(excuse spellings)
-
Can we have a vote on removing subjects that don't belong here and sending them to their rightful place?
This is a football forum.
-
Thanks Branton as I thought this thread is the Brexit debate in microcosm. After 18 months of posturturing and pointless negotiation Theresa May has suceeding in uniting the country in so far as most people think her deal is terrible. The country is still deeply divided and if anything views have hardened.
I voted for Anything else because:
a) some sort of close CU/SM agreement is the only possible deal that will mitigate the effect of leaving the EU whilst still leaving the EU
b) I dont think May will have the vote. Throughout her time as PM if it has ever looked as though she would loose she has either backed down or avoided the vote. There's nowhere to back down too this time.
-
The whole brexit thing is a clusterf**k of the highest order..
-
Let’s have a general election and vote labour in, that way we can do what it says in there manifesto! We still get to leave
-
Righto then BS.
There's 50,000 tonnes of food per day imported through UK ports from the EU.
None of that has to be inspected or customs checked.
Enlighten us. When we have a Hard Brexit, how do we manage the fact that all of this will have to be checked and recorded. Given that we haven't built any extra infrastructure, or employed any more border officials.
-
Why don’t we get a chance to vote on this “deal”.?
Why should we? I thought parliament was sovereign?
The people are sovereign parliament acts on our behalf
-
Why don’t we get a chance to vote on this “deal”.?
Why should we? I thought parliament was sovereign?
The people are sovereign parliament acts on our behalf
Not according to the remoaners on here, according to them (mainly bst) parliament is sovereign, and the refferendum was just advisory.
Pound to a pinch of shit, that if we had another people's vote and remain won, they wouldn't be saying the same
-
Not according to the remoaners on here, according to them (mainly bst) parliament is sovereign, and the refferendum was just advisory.
FACT
-
Righto then BS.
There's 50,000 tonnes of food per day imported through UK ports from the EU.
None of that has to be inspected or customs checked.
Enlighten us. When we have a Hard Brexit, how do we manage the fact that all of this will have to be checked and recorded. Given that we haven't built any extra infrastructure, or employed any more border officials.
First of all, show me the evidence of 50 000 tonnes, and the evidence that NONE of it has to be checked.
Yes there may be some delays, INITIALLY, but it hardly would be a disaster, and would get ironed out quickly out of necessity.
How much do we export anyway?
-
You're a strange one BS.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1JV1JE
Do you regularly deal with people who make shit up to win arguments?
-
Not according to the remoaners on here, according to them (mainly bst) parliament is sovereign, and the refferendum was just advisory.
FACT
Thankyou, there is no right of a people's vote, or a second referendum, and if there is then it's only advisory and holds no legal clout . I.e. pointless.
Remoaners who demand a second referendum. Hypocrisy of the highest order.
-
You're a strange one BS.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1JV1JE
Do you regularly deal with people who make shit up to win arguments?
I refer you to my previous post
-
Not according to the remoaners on here, according to them (mainly bst) parliament is sovereign, and the refferendum was just advisory.
FACT
Precisely
It's astonishing how many people have strident opinions about our democratic system without actually understanding it.
Parliament is the over-riding sovereign body in this country.
The people vote Parliamentarians in, but then it is Parliament's decision as to what happens.
Cameron (and any other MP who said it) was dangerously out of order in saying that Parliament must follow the decision of any referendum. It is not in the power of anyone, PM or anyone else to make that sort of decision.
If you want to live in a plebiscitary democracy, campaign for it and vote for MPs who would work to change our constitutional system. It's a lot more productive and positive than pontificating about what you think people who you disagree with might have thought in hypothetical scenarios.
-
We have triggered article 50
We will leave the EU next March.
Whether we leave with the deal the PM has negotiated or no deal is now up to Parliament.
Unless there is more negotiation, there are no other alternatives. Full stop.
Everything else is hot air.
We cannot reverse article 50
-
You're a strange one BS.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1JV1JE
Do you regularly deal with people who make shit up to win arguments?
I refer you to my previous post
You've lost me. There's a piece quoting UK retail industry spokespeople saying that we import 50,000 tonnes of food a day from the EU with minimal inspection.
What are you wanting? A hologram of a customs officer to tell you to your face?
-
We have triggered article 50
We will leave the EU next March.
Whether we leave with the deal the PM has negotiated or no deal is now up to Parliament.
Unless there is more negotiation, there are no other alternatives. Full stop.
Everything else is hot air.
We cannot reverse article 50
Of course we can.
-
The bloke who wrote it even said we can reverse it...
-
SS1953
You're buying into May's nonsense.
She wants people to think the decision is between her deal and no deal. Because, as No Deal is utter lunacy which will cripple us economically for a generation, people will then support her deal.
Frankly, that is utter b*llocks. There are many other possibilities.
-
BS. You've hit the nail on the head here.
"Yes there may be some delays, INITIALLY, but it hardly would be a disaster, and would get ironed out quickly out of necessity."
Of course we wouldn't run out of food. Because that would be lunacy.
What we would do, is ignore the very thing that we had voted for. We'd ignore the fact that we'd left the CU and SM, and carry on accepting food from the EU without checks, as though nothing had happened. And we'd do the same thing with all other goods from the EU.
Of course we would. Because the alternative would be mass starvation and industry grinding to a halt and of course that's not going to happen.
Oh yeah. Hang on a minute though.
WTO rules, which we would be then moving onto, state explicitly that a nation cannot give preferential treatment to one WTO member without giving it to all.
So, if we allow EU goods in with no customs payments, no quality checks, no hygiene checks, no safety checks, we also have to do that to all our imports from every other country on the planet.
Taking back control of our borders eh? That's showing the world who is in charge.
-
As of now, 39% of people who have voted have said they want a No Deal or clean break Brexit.
I'm fascinated.
Have you seen the predictions of the effect of a Hard Brexit?
Forget the idiots who shout Project Fear everytime someone points out a problem. Put them to one side for a moment, and keep them there u til they explain why everything will be alright.
Then go and look at what pretty much EVERY economics expert is saying about Hard Brexit.
They are saying that a Hard Brexit will mean that the UK will lose 5-10% of GDP for the foreseeable future.
Let that sink in for a minute.
And then think about the last recession.
Then, we lost 2-3% of GDP for 18 months.
The result was that unemployment went up by nearly a million. And wages have stagnated for a decade.
So I'm really fascinated. What benefits do you see that justify the economic carnage that pretty much everyone says will be the result of a Hard Brexit?
Or, if you don't believe those predictions, why not? What do YOU think will happen?
-
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
-
This thread for me is a microcosm of why such complex and important decisions shouldn't be decided in Me v You public referendum votes anyway.
Can somebody please point out a bonafide reason why we should be happy to not be in the EU please.
-
BST,
Please tell me the legitimate mechanism for reversing the UK governments triggering of Article 50.
As far as I understand, a legal agreement has been signed. How can it be put aside?
-
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
Unfortunately studies have pointed to xenophobia as strong reasons for brexit and as many brexiters are unable/unwilling to show any worthwhile reasons/benefit for exiting europe for themselves or the country one can't help feeling that this is indeed the case however abhorrent the conclusion may be.
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
And it does stand. Until it's gets superceded, just like every other vote we've ever had in this country.
-
This thread for me is a microcosm of why such complex and important decisions shouldn't be decided in Me v You public referendum votes anyway.
Can somebody please point out a bonafide reason why we should be happy to not be in the EU please.
So wi can tek bak controrrrrl a' ar Kitsonreh!
-
BST,
Please tell me the legitimate mechanism for reversing the UK governments triggering of Article 50.
As far as I understand, a legal agreement has been signed. How can it be put aside?
It went to European Court a couple week ago and they ruled that the UK can unilaterally revoke article 50.
Edit: actually it was today.
-
BST,
Please tell me the legitimate mechanism for reversing the UK governments triggering of Article 50.
As far as I understand, a legal agreement has been signed. How can it be put aside?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46428579
-
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
-
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
-
Supporting articles of above post.
Govt incompetence/indefference
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/04/four-million-british-workers-live-in-poverty-charity-says
Everday racism.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/03/flatshare-bias-room-seekers-with-muslim-name-get-fewer-replies
More incompetence
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/dec/04/thousands-of-hard-to-teach-pupils-removed-from-schools-ofsted
More indifference
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/03/uk-debt-case-study-council-more-aggressive-payday-lenders
-
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
-
Laurels
At this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
Economics didn’t come into it? Surely that’s the most important thing???
-
LaurelsAt this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
Economics didn’t come into it? Surely that’s the most important thing???
Nope, not for me and I dare say the majority of voters. ( Except the richest 5%)
-
So you're saying that the majority of voters didn't care that they were deliberately voting to make themselves poorer just to stick two fingers up to the EU.
Jesus wept.
-
LaurelsAt this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
Economics didn’t come into it? Surely that’s the most important thing???
Nope, not for me and I dare say the majority of voters. ( Except the richest 5%)
So you're either retired, unemployed or Jacob Rees-Mogg. It will affect yours and your families jobs, it will make people poorer especially an area like Doncaster. Even the pro-Brexit people have said any benefits will be 50 years down the line.
-
LaurelsAt this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
Economics didn’t come into it? Surely that’s the most important thing???
Nope, not for me and I dare say the majority of voters. ( Except the richest 5%)
Not for me either, but then again I didn’t realise the full economic implications of Brexit, my view has changed, better the devil you know
-
LaurelsAt this point Billy it's a combination of flat out xenophobes, and people who are too proud to admit they believed the lies.
I'd like to hope that there is nobody stupid enough to still believe it is an economically sound idea.
The sooner somebody points out the direct correlation between areas of the country which have been trashed by the government and leave voters, the sooner this whole farce can be abandoned.
What a short sighted and insulting view. But I'll forgive you, and chalk it down to you being less informed.
Lets take the emotion out of the above so you can help us out here and refute each point bs.
1/ xenophobia has been shown to be a reason for people to support brexit as other reasons show little material gain.
2/ It is possible people are reluctant to admit they have been duped, no one is happy to have the wool pulled over .....
3/ there anyone out there stupid enough to believe brexit is a sound idea? brexit is still supported despite mountains of evidence telling us it is a very bad idea.
4/Pointing out areas in Britain where they have been trashed by the government and leave voters. There are very few areas in Britain that do not have growing poverty with people relying on food banks to survive, not sure this can be attributed directly to leave voters except that the uncertainty over the last few years has shown to have affected trade, it can however be directly attributed to government incompetence as per austerity.
5/ short sighted view? It's mostly supportable by evidence, insulting? to whom? some people are just plain racists. I am not tagging you with this label bs but the guardian has just published information showing just that.
To me and the vast majority of brexiteers, it shows how desperate and weak the remainers argument is by shouting xenophobia/ racism.
It's weak and pathetic.
I certainly don't think I've been duped, economics didn't come into it for me when I voted, and again I dare say the vast majority. It all boils down to ideology, something the left and remainers are scared to admit.
Do I think the government has done a good job ? No
Are the EU being awkward, yes you can't blame them.
Economics didn’t come into it? Surely that’s the most important thing???
Nope, not for me and I dare say the majority of voters. ( Except the richest 5%)
A meltdown in the economy will probably affect your standard of living more if you are working class rather than if you are very wealthy.
-
So you're saying that the majority of voters didn't care that they were deliberately voting to make themselves poorer just to stick two fingers up to the EU.
Jesus wept.
I'm not saying that, keep up
-
Say what you want about Treeza, she's managed to unite the DUP and Labour on the contempt of Parliament issue. So she's accomplished something, at least.
-
I'm totally confused at what you are saying BS (although in fairness, you are the only one who has responded).
Are you saying:
1) You do accept the opinion of the vast majority of economists, that Hard Brexit will make us poorer by an amount that utterly dwarfs the 2008 recession, but there are advantages that outweigh that. In which case, can you tell us what they are.
Or
2) That you don't believe the vast majority of economists' predictions. In which case, can you explain why not?
-
I agree that we didn’t have the full facts. The really annoying aspect of all this are the politicians themselves. Very few of them really care. All the resignations and all the rhetorical nonsense being spouted is about self glorification. In my personal view this should not be about their personal views. They all know how their own individual constituency voted. They are there to represent their constituents. No matter which way they voted they should all go with their constituents who they are elected to represent. If your constituents voted in and you think out unlucky in my view you should represent the people who voted for you not your own personal view
-
Phil
No. That's absolutely not how our system works.
We don't elect delegates who are mandated to vote in a specific way. We elect representatives who are supposed to weigh up issues and decide in good conscience how to vote.
If you don't like how they vote, you can vote against them at the next GE.
THAT is how our system works.
-
Supporting articles of above post.
Govt incompetence/indefference
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/04/four-million-british-workers-live-in-poverty-charity-says
Everday racism.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/03/flatshare-bias-room-seekers-with-muslim-name-get-fewer-replies
More incompetence
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/dec/04/thousands-of-hard-to-teach-pupils-removed-from-schools-ofsted
More indifference
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/03/uk-debt-case-study-council-more-aggressive-payday-lenders
I voted to leave because I don’t agree with the EU having any direct or indirect political influence in the mechanism of the UK. So, which category does that put me in? Racist, Xenophobic? Indifferent? Ignorant?
-
Phil
No. That's absolutely not how our system works.
We don't elect delegates who are mandated to vote in a specific way. We elect representatives who are supposed to weigh up issues and decide in good conscience how to vote.
If you don't like how they vote, you can vote against them at the next GE.
THAT is how our system works.
I’m sure you’re right, however that does contradict the opinion of many Remain supporting MP’s (particularly in London) who regularly say that theyre representing the opinions of their constituents who voted to remain by a majority.
-
I'm totally confused at what you are saying BS (although in fairness, you are the only one who has responded).
Are you saying:
1) You do accept the opinion of the vast majority of economists, that Hard Brexit will make us poorer by an amount that utterly dwarfs the 2008 recession, but there are advantages that outweigh that. In which case, can you tell us what they are.
Or
2) That you don't believe the vast majority of economists' predictions. In which case, can you explain why not?
I accept there may be economic consequences, but nowhere near the exaggerated claims of remainers, that use the economic argument to argue their ideological standpoint.
I also believe it will mainly affect the rich and London more than anywhere else.
I voted leave for 2 reasons.
1. British sovereignty ( we vote a government to govern our country, and I don't want the undemocratic e.u having indirect control)
2. Immigration, we are a small island with limited infrastructure and services.
By all means come here, but it needs to be MUTUALLY beneficial .
Perhaps a point based system ?
-
BS
On what evidence do you base your belief that the economic consequences won't be as bad as the vast majority of economists predict?
Do you believe that they are all politically motivated, and have compromised their professional integrity to mislead the country?
-
BS
On what evidence do you base your belief that the economic consequences won't be as bad as the vast majority of economists predict?
Do you believe that they are all politically motivated, and have compromised their professional integrity to mislead the country?
I didn't say the vast majority of economists.
-
No. I did.
The vast majority of economists predict a very severe and very long term economic hit.
Why don't you believe them?
-
I agree that we didn’t have the full facts. The really annoying aspect of all this are the politicians themselves. Very few of them really care. All the resignations and all the rhetorical nonsense being spouted is about self glorification. In my personal view this should not be about their personal views. They all know how their own individual constituency voted. They are there to represent their constituents. No matter which way they voted they should all go with their constituents who they are elected to represent. If your constituents voted in and you think out unlucky in my view you should represent the people who voted for you not your own personal view
In which case Teresa May - whose constituency voted Remain - should be arguing and voting against her own deal! Explain that one away. :silly:
-
No. I did.
The vast majority of economists predict a very severe and very long term economic hit.
Why don't you believe them?
I didn't say I didn't believe them .
It varies in severity depending which rag your reading.
The reality is that the economy won't grow as well as the e.u INITIALLY.
-
Jacob Rees-Mogg said it'll take decades before we see benefit did he not? aye, f**kin get in!
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
-
Jacob Rees-Mogg said it'll take decades before we see benefit did he not? aye, f**kin get in!
Aye he did, but your missing the point
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
It's terrible, and one of the main reasons I voted out. But tell this to a remainer, and all you will hear in reply is ...... ' but but but enonomy ! '
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
We could have vetoed each and every one of them if we wanted to.
EDIT: PS https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN07092
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
Well, you've got the question the wrong way round. Why is it a bad thing?
That's the way it goes. Surely the rationale behind a referendum is that there is something wrong (enough doubt) with the status quo - to warrant a vote about.
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
We could have vetoed each and every one of them if we wanted to.
EDIT: PS https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN07092
You’ve missed an important bit though Glyn. The U.K. is able to veto some laws but for others it needs at least 3 allies to join its veto. If fewer than 4 countries oppose a law then its passed.
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
Well, you've got the question the wrong way round. Why is it a bad thing?
That's the way it goes. Surely the rationale behind a referendum is that there is something wrong (enough doubt) with the status quo - to warrant a vote about.
No, the question isn’t the wrong way around. I voted to leave because I disagree with the EU having political influence in the U.K. However, if anyone can share why this benefits the UK then I’m quite happy to change my mind on the matter.
-
Are all the eu laws bad, or are many beneficial?
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
Well, you've got the question the wrong way round. Why is it a bad thing?
That's the way it goes. Surely the rationale behind a referendum is that there is something wrong (enough doubt) with the status quo - to warrant a vote about.
No, the question isn’t the wrong way around. I voted to leave because I disagree with the EU having political influence in the U.K. However, if anyone can share why this benefits the UK then I’m quite happy to change my mind on the matter.
You're making a point about legal sovereignty, absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the content of whether those laws are good for society or not. Which is the question you think you're asking.
You are aware what will happen? Because of the complexity - we will just adopt EU laws wholesale and call them 'domestic' laws changing absolutely little (in fact nothing at first) to do with their content.
-
Was it Davis or IDS who said that we haven't actually wanted to stop any of the EU rules being implemented but wanted to leave to stop them 'imposing' them because of the principle.
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
We could have vetoed each and every one of them if we wanted to.
EDIT: PS https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN07092
You’ve missed an important bit though Glyn. The U.K. is able to veto some laws but for others it needs at least 3 allies to join its veto. If fewer than 4 countries oppose a law then its passed.
That's not been the case for all those years though. Plus, Parliament could have at any time voted down anything put before them they didn't want to accept.
Any comment on the link I provided at all?
-
HA
The benefit is that we have unfettered access to the biggest and richest economic market in world history.
That's how things work. You choose ceding a certain amount of choice for the economic benefits.
And that's before you factor in what a right-wing Govt would do in this country if it was entirely free to make its own political decisions. On stuff like working conditions. Holiday pay. Maternity leave. Environmental regulations. Etc etc.
-
Are all the eu laws bad, or are many beneficial?
Most of them are about harmonisation - ie standard regulations throughout the EU as a whole, to make trading more frictionless as everyone is using the same standards. Which is why the UK adopted them - it was advantageous to us when exporting to other EU countries.
-
IDS.
It was Davis.
And then there is the other issue which I've raised countless times and which no Brexit supporter has ever addressed.
Why is it that the only two major world statesmen who support Hard Brexit are Putin and Trump? Do you think they have the best interests of the folk of Donny front and central in their minds?
-
I’m still waiting for somebody to answer this:
Between 1993 & 2014 62% of laws introduced in the UK were to implement EU obligations, whether the UK voted for them or not. Why is this a good thing?
Well, you've got the question the wrong way round. Why is it a bad thing?
That's the way it goes. Surely the rationale behind a referendum is that there is something wrong (enough doubt) with the status quo - to warrant a vote about.
No, the question isn’t the wrong way around. I voted to leave because I disagree with the EU having political influence in the U.K. However, if anyone can share why this benefits the UK then I’m quite happy to change my mind on the matter.
You're making a point about legal sovereignty, absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the content of whether those laws are good for society or not. Which is the question you think you're asking.
You are aware what will happen? Because of the complexity - we will just adopt EU laws wholesale and call them 'domestic' laws changing absolutely little (in fact nothing at first) to do with their content.
Ok, you’re right I am referring to sovereignty. However, the question still stands. According to Vote Watch, between 2009 and 2015 the U.K. was on the losing side of EU votes that had internal legal impacts on 12.3% of the votes. So, while we voted for the majority of laws it does mean that the U.K. does have to accept laws that our democraticly elected MEP’s voted against. Is it right that these laws are imposed on us?
-
BS
I don't read reports in the papers about what economists say. Or at least I don't draw my conclusions from press articles. I tend to read their own reports and blogs. Very easy to find. I suggest you try it.
-
IDS.
It was Davis.
And then there is the other issue which I've raised countless times and which no Brexit supporter has ever addressed.
Why is it that the only two major world statesmen who support Hard Brexit are Putin and Trump? Do you think they have the best interests of the folk of Donny front and central in their minds?
It seems that we all have unanswered and uncomfortable questions...
-
Which ones of yours haven't been answered?
-
I find this nonsense about the EU being undemocratic tragic.
You vote for an MEP (votes which have incredibly poor public turnout).
The MEP votes, the majority vote wins. Exactly the same as our domestic structure.
I live in a large Labour area. Nearly everything the Tories propose is bad for us. Unfortunately, my Labour MP doesn't have sole veto powers, as otherwise nothing would ever get done.
Fact is, we are a big name in the EU. We help run it. It's not Germany dictating everything like the Express would have you believe.
And I would like to see one example of an EU law that is actively bad for British citizens. You know, like them human rights. Labour Laws. Food quality controls. Maternity Leave.
-
Compared to our own government who have given us shit pensions, shit NHS, shit policing, shit transport and only care about London.
-
If this forum is representative of the UK people as a whole then the vote on here suggests that a second referendum could be very popular.
-
I think Parliament has just killed off Brexit and probably this Government as well.
-
I find this nonsense about the EU being undemocratic tragic.
You vote for an MEP (votes which have incredibly poor public turnout).
The MEP votes, the majority vote wins. Exactly the same as our domestic structure.
I live in a large Labour area. Nearly everything the Tories propose is bad for us. Unfortunately, my Labour MP doesn't have sole veto powers, as otherwise nothing would ever get done.
Fact is, we are a big name in the EU. We help run it. It's not Germany dictating everything like the Express would have you believe.
And I would like to see one example of an EU law that is actively bad for British citizens. You know, like them human rights. Labour Laws. Food quality controls. Maternity Leave.
The Port Services Regulation of 2017 which has always been opposed by UK MEP’s, the UK Government and British Port Authorities but has still become a legislative requirement as the majority of other EU countries voted for it.
-
Is there a mechanism in this Country to impeach the PM?
-
HA
Yes. That's how compromise works.
-
HA
The benefit is that we have unfettered access to the biggest and richest economic market in world history.
That's how things work. You choose ceding a certain amount of choice for the economic benefits.
And that's before you factor in what a right-wing Govt would do in this country if it was entirely free to make its own political decisions. On stuff like working conditions. Holiday pay. Maternity leave. Environmental regulations. Etc etc.
Billy,
Sorry, I didn’t see this reply before I posted earlier.
No, this isn’t how things work, it’s how the EU had evolved into the beast that we have now. It has a huge amount of political control over member states and it’s ability to override its democratically elected governments and MEP’s. Just look at how the EU threatend sanctions against Italy if it didn’t amend its recent budget or how they’ve recently sued the Poland over its changes to its internal judiciary. These are all democratically elected governments who are being overuled by the EU! How can that be right?
-
Having just watched the debate, I have to say that Corbyn played a blinder.
-
HA
The benefit is that we have unfettered access to the biggest and richest economic market in world history.
That's how things work. You choose ceding a certain amount of choice for the economic benefits.
And that's before you factor in what a right-wing Govt would do in this country if it was entirely free to make its own political decisions. On stuff like working conditions. Holiday pay. Maternity leave. Environmental regulations. Etc etc.
Billy,
Sorry, I didn’t see this reply before I posted earlier.
No, this isn’t how things work, it’s how the EU had evolved into the beast that we have now. It has a huge amount of political control over member states and it’s ability to override its democratically elected governments and MEP’s. Just look at how the EU threatend sanctions against Italy if it didn’t amend its recent budget or how they’ve recently sued the Poland over its changes to its internal judiciary. These are all democratically elected governments who are being overuled by the EU! How can that be right?
Because they are following the rules that ALL EU member states agreed to
The fact that new right wing Polish and Italian governments ignored their what previous governments had agreed to caused the problem not the EU
-
HA
The Italy thing.
All EU Govts decided, freely in the early 2000s to keep Govt deficits to less than 3% of GDP.
For what it's worth, I think that was badly mistaken. But it was a decision that Govts of all the countries signed up to. It wasn't a diktat of the EU.
-
Having just watched the debate, I have to say that Corbyn played a blinder.
Did he say anything? I thought he just left it to Starmer?
-
Having just watched the debate, I have to say that Corbyn played a blinder.
Did he say anything? I thought he just left it to Starmer?
If he did keep quiet it was probably what HA thought he played a blinder.
He couldn’t put his foot in it.
-
Having just watched the debate, I have to say that Corbyn played a blinder.
Did he say anything? I thought he just left it to Starmer?
HA will have to clarify which debate he meant but Corbyn had just sat down after his reply to May's opening address of the main Brexit debate if that helps. Starmer spoke (and won) the legal advice declaration earlier this afternoon.
-
A couple of bits of useless trivia.
Theresa May lost more votes today than Gordon Brown did in his entire premiership.
From the formation of the English Parliament by Magna Carta in 1215, through the turmoil of the Civil Wars and the extension to the UK Parliament in 1801 - this is the first time EVER that MP's have found the Government to be in contempt of Parliament.
-
A couple of bits of useless trivia.
Theresa May lost more votes today than Gordon Brown did in his entire premiership.
From the formation of the English Parliament by Magna Carta in 1215, through the turmoil of the Civil Wars and the extension to the UK Parliament in 1801 - this is the first time EVER that MP's have found the Government to be in contempt of Parliament.
And yet she still ploughs on regardless, ignoring all around her
-
:lol:
Having just watched the debate, I have to say that Corbyn played a blinder.
Did he say anything? I thought he just left it to Starmer?
If he did keep quiet it was probably what HA thought he played a blinder.
He couldn’t put his foot in it.
😁 That’s not what I meant but it’s a fair point!!
-
HA
The Italy thing.
All EU Govts decided, freely in the early 2000s to keep Govt deficits to less than 3% of GDP.
For what it's worth, I think that was badly mistaken. But it was a decision that Govts of all the countries signed up to. It wasn't a diktat of the EU.
Well that's just great.
Millions of lives ruined due to double digit % unemployment for the last six years. All seemingly justified of course, because the European Union, as it does, provided a way for the political class of Italy to vote away their ability to do anything about it 15 years ago. And with it went the ability of the ordinary Italians to hold anyone to account for it via the ballot box.
They don't want these levels of unemployment anymore. They want to change it. But they can't. And that's that!
Where's that David Davis quote again? A real favourite of the anti-Brexit brigade. Something about democracies being able to change their mind. Well someone had better f**king let the Italians know about it! No wonder they're now pretty much desperate enough to vote any old unsavoury, agitating Kitson like Salvini into power who says he'll change things and stand up for them. And I don't blame them one bit. The same might happen here soon if things go the way they're going.
Democratic accountability. Or a lack thereof, is one of the most compelling arguments AGAINST the European Union. The political class of a nation gradually moving politics and the decisions (and the accountability that goes with it) which affect the lives of ordinary people, above and beyond the reach of those same ordinary people. Surprise, surprise! They don't seem to like this indirect, remote form of politics very much.
How many more nations need to go the same way as Italy before these politicians actually get the message?
-
I'm in favour of a 2nd Referendum.
But did we really need a 2nd Brexit thread on here?
-
I'm in favour of a 2nd Referendum.
But did we really need a 2nd Brexit thread on here?
There's already been one referendum but for most on here that's not enough.
We need to keep voting until we get the 'right' result. It's EU policy.
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
That argument doesn't work, it can be applied to all elections.
When people voted for Bliar, did they demand another vote after he took us into an illegal war killing thousands and leading to the creation of isis?
It's impossible to know the full facts of what may happen in the future.
-
When people voted for Bliar, did they demand another vote after he took us into an illegal war killing thousands and leading to the creation of isis?
There's a general election every 5 years; people knew they would have a vote to shoe him out and when. Brexit is irreversible; for the next generation or 2 at least.
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
That argument doesn't work, it can be applied to all elections.
When people voted for Bliar, did they demand another vote after he took us into an illegal war killing thousands and leading to the creation of isis?
It's impossible to know the full facts of what may happen in the future.
Switzerland. They regularly have referendums and aren't afraid to reverse the decision when they realise they got it wrong. That undemocratic fascist dictatorship!
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
As far as I remember the referendum was clear enough, leave or remain?
Definition of leave:A1 [ I or T ] to go away from someone or something, for a short time or permanently:
I'll be leaving at five o'clock tomorrow.
He left the house by the back door.
She left the group of people she was with and came over to speak to us.
The bus leaves in five minutes.
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
As far as I remember the referendum was clear enough, leave or remain?
Definition of leave:A1 [ I or T ] to go away from someone or something, for a short time or permanently:
I'll be leaving at five o'clock tomorrow.
He left the house by the back door.
She left the group of people she was with and came over to speak to us.
The bus leaves in five minutes.
The bus leaves in 5 minutes, but you still have to decide which bus to get on don’t you. There isn’t just one bus that takes you everywhere.
-
There were people voting for all different kinds of Leave. No one had any idea what we'd come out with - and of course, there were people voting for a version of Leave that was pure fantasy.
All of your examples are clear examples of something that we know exactly what will happen. We're a few months away from our exit date and we still don't really properly know.
-
Despite the Brexit subject being at saturation proportions on this forum, there is still a clash on if we should stay or go.
https://youtu.be/BN1WwnEDWAM
-
Despite the Brexit subject being at saturation proportions on this forum, there is still a clash on if we should stay or go.
https://youtu.be/BN1WwnEDWAM
So the only sensible option is to take the result at its word regarding the question asked and leave now making it a clean break. No divorce bill, just leave.
Why can people not accept the result? I guarantee if remain had won we would have never heard another thing about this.
-
AL
As numerous people have noted, that was the problem with the Referendum in 2016..
Leave was a single, well defined outcome.
Leave was an umbrella term that covered dozens of potential outcomes.
There was never and there still isn't anything remotely close to a majority for a No Deal Brexit. That was barely even discussed in 2016 and it certainly wasn't advocated by the Leave campaign.
Leaving on those terms would be the ultimate perversion of the Referendum result.
-
Despite the Brexit subject being at saturation proportions on this forum, there is still a clash on if we should stay or go.
https://youtu.be/BN1WwnEDWAM
So the only sensible option is to take the result at its word regarding the question asked and leave now making it a clean break. No divorce bill, just leave.
Why can people not accept the result? I guarantee if remain had won we would have never heard another thing about this.
Nigel Farage didn't guarantee this. The exact reverse, in fact. So anything you guarantee is worthless.
-
AL
As numerous people have noted, that was the problem with the Referendum in 2016..
Leave was a single, well defined outcome.
Leave was an umbrella term that covered dozens of potential outcomes.
There was never and there still isn't anything remotely close to a majority for a No Deal Brexit. That was barely even discussed in 2016 and it certainly wasn't advocated by the Leave campaign.
Leaving on those terms would be the ultimate perversion of the Referendum result.
No-one mentioned beforehand leaving with conditions. This was only a creation of the remainers after they unexpectedly lost.
-
It is hard to imagine that anyone thought we could just leave, without any conditions.
-
AL
As numerous people have noted, that was the problem with the Referendum in 2016..
Leave was a single, well defined outcome.
Leave was an umbrella term that covered dozens of potential outcomes.
There was never and there still isn't anything remotely close to a majority for a No Deal Brexit. That was barely even discussed in 2016 and it certainly wasn't advocated by the Leave campaign.
Leaving on those terms would be the ultimate perversion of the Referendum result.
No need to worry though agent May has done a cracking job of creating such a rotten deal that we will probably end up staying in, either officially or by any other name. More decades of misery and serfdom to come...
-
It is hard to imagine that anyone thought we could just leave, without any conditions.
Why? It was a simple enough question. However big business and the powers that be have conspired to betray us all.
-
I would rather belong to a poor nation that was free than to a rich nation that had ceased to be in love with liberty.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
You are right BB. Everrone I know who voted Leave voted to do just that. Leave without all this negotiation. A clean break.
Now that some of them have realised that this would be a disaster they have changed their minds.
Only a second vote will sort this out.
-
I thought I could just leave first wife, I soon learnt that wasn’t the case
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
You are right BB. Everrone I know who voted Leave voted to do just that. Leave without all this negotiation. A clean break.
Now that some of them have realised that this would be a disaster they have changed their minds.
Only a second vote will sort this out.
So how many times will we be voting?
Will we have another referendum if ref 2 results in staying in and then when the dust settles the country realises it has made has made a BIG mistake?
-
You can't leave a f**king phone contract without lengthy negotiations and a fee to pay. Why on earth would anyone think an entire country could just up and leave a decades-old trading bloc with thousands of complex rules, regulations, and trade deals in place - without first settling all the commitments we've previously agreed to? Anyone who says they don't understand this either genuinely doesn't understand it or does understand it and is lying to you, but either way, they've forfeited their seat at the grown-up discussion table.
-
Well, now that the Grieve amendment has given the HoC the right to decide on any changes after the May deal is voted down, then Hard Brexit/No Deal are off the agenda.
The numbers are not there, something May should have taken into account long ago.
So it will either be a modified deal (Norway Plus etc), or remain.....in response to a vote in a new referendum or a GE.
I can't see any other outcome, now that the published legal advice is that the backstop could be indefinite. Will the Dupsters ever go for that?
-
If it's made clear prior to the vote that this one is final and binding on this issue then hopefully it will concentrate people's minds and at least we'll get the result from an informed position, whatever the outcome.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
Same here BB. I voted to leave and, while I knew we’d have to pay something, I thought that we’d then just walk away. My suspicions were raised when, immediately after the result was announced, the EU forbid any other member state to begin trade talks with the UK, despite a number of countries wanting to begin their own trade negotiations immediately.
-
BB/AL/HA
I'm not sure who you were listening to during the Referendum when you reckon no-one was talking about deals and conditions.
The Leave campaign consistently talked about deals and agreements.
Here's Chris Grayling talking about "formal negotiations leading to a new UK-EU treaty", the week before the vote
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/a_framework_for_taking_back_control_and_establishing_a_new_uk_eu_deal_after_23_june.html
Here's a whole string of them telling us how a Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, EEA deal would be grand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
Here's Farage still talking about a deal six months AFTER the referendum before he decided that No Deal was actually what he meant.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-09/farage-predicts-norwegian-style-deal-for-britain-post-brexit
I'm guessing they all realised that deals come with conditions. Shame they didn't make that clear to Leave voters, eh?
-
Farage's farrago kind of makes the point that I was making further up the thread.
Brexit wasn't a single thing. It was a convenient umbrella to cover everything and anyone who had any complaints or misgivings about the EU.
It was NEVER clear before the referendum whether a Leave vote was supporting No Deal, Canada+ deal (actually, that was never mentioned during the campaign - Rees-Mogg and the ERG seem to have come up with it about a year ago), Norway deal, Switzerland deal, Norway+, Switzerland+, Free Trade Agreement, leaving the political aspects of the EU but staying in the CU and SM, taying in the CU but not the SM, staying in the SM but not the CU. Etc, etc etc.
Farage regularly talked about a Norway deal during the campaign. Then he stopped talking about it when someone pointed out that Norway has freedom of movement. Then he started talking about it again after the vote. Then he stopped and started talking about a No Deal Brexit.
No one can put their hand on their heart and say that they KNEW what a Leave vote was going to result in. They can say what THEY wanted, but they cannot possibly say what the other 17m wanted. Because the very people who led the campaign that took us into this shit storm didn't know, and have regularly changed their minds since the vote.
So, as I say, Brexit wasn't a single thing.
NOW we have some idea of what Brexit might mean.
It's a deal that leaves us tied into many of the structures of the EU but insulated from the very worst economic consequences.
Or it's a No Deal that every reasonable economist says will lose us a LOT of wealth, and which will tear up the Good Friday Agreement unless Boris and co can find the magic technology that means the Irish border won't be a problem.
But here's the thing. No way on earth did a majority of people in June 2016 vote for either of those outcomes.
So choosing one of them will be an utterly undemocratic decision. It will impose an outcome that the majority of the UK didn't vote for and don't want.
If the No Deal supporters are so sure of themselves, put it to another referendum now.
No Deal or Remain.
See what the outcome will be.
-
If it's made clear prior to the vote that this one is final and binding on this issue then hopefully it will concentrate people's minds and at least we'll get the result from an informed position, whatever the outcome.
If it's a referendum, again, it shouldn't be binding. However Parliament will be a lot more comfortable with voting on reversing Article 50 as they know it won't plunge us into economic disaster. Or most of them will be, anyway.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that highlights much of my point.. even people who voted leave aren’t going to get what they thought they would.. yes we would leave, but leave with conditions - conditions which we didn’t actually vote on.!!
-
It would have been ideal to have been able to vote for a clearly defined Brexit, don’t you think, regardless of whether you vote leave or stay.?
We will end up with a situation which satisfies no one..
Great idea it was to vote for a massive change when no one knew what it meant in reality, with no chance to reverse or reinforce the original outcome.. where’s the democracy in that.?
My argument isn’t about leave or remain, it’s about having clarity.. a vote on the deal or a 2nd referendum may give a larger leave majority but at least that would be on the grounds of more realistic information..
As far as I remember the referendum was clear enough, leave or remain?
Definition of leave:A1 [ I or T ] to go away from someone or something, for a short time or permanently:
I'll be leaving at five o'clock tomorrow.
He left the house by the back door.
She left the group of people she was with and came over to speak to us.
The bus leaves in five minutes.
Don’t be daft..
A more suitable analogy of the use of “leave” to compare with the brexit referendum would be to say that:
Should I leave my job at the end of the month or not? I don’t have a job lined up and I have a mortgage and all sorts of financial commitments.. should I take a risk of having no income or stay with what I have.??
I have been in that situation and believe me, stay in with what you know and with what you have is the better option.!
-
AL.
Clear enough was it?
So why were all those Leave supporters talking about different sorts of deals and negotiations? Can you find ANY prominent Leave supporter from 2016 who said back then that the leave they wanted was for us to leave without a deal on future relations between us and Europe?
-
You can't leave a f**king phone contract without lengthy negotiations and a fee to pay.
I've never had much trouble leaving a phone contract, and I've never had one tell me that I can't get a contract from other companies unless I agree to their contract severance demands.
-
BST. Of course I expected some form of settlement figure, but I thought any future dealings with the EU would have been sorted after we left, and not used by the EU as a bargaining tool.
-
BB.
I think you're not getting this concept of deals.
We want a deal, right. A deal. Not dealing. A deal. That's an agreement where we get something. Something good. Something that we want. Like buying ad selling stuff with Europe, without lots of faffing about. That's what we want.
But we don't want to be part of the club where they have agreed the rules and procedures about how to do all that without faffing about.
Now, you no what happens to people who say "I want! I want! I want!" but don't give anything back? Yes. They don't get.
So, those people in Europe are saying, if you want all the nice good things, we'll need you to be good boys and girls and agree to all these rules.
Otherwise you can f**k off and look after yourselves and see how you get on. Like Mr Farage and Mr Rees-Mogg and Mr Trump and Mr Putin say you should do.
-
BST, I think the EU is trying to stop us from f**king off by refusing to let other willing EU countries do deals with us.
-
Well, see, all the other EU countries have this thing called the Customs Unions and this other thing called the Single Market, that they signed up to because it helps them to trade with each other.
And those countries have all, of their own free will, agreed that they will not, individually, sign trade deals with any country outside the SM and CU. Because that would mean that the CU and SM would be pointless and they would lose all the benefits of being in the CU and SM.
Are you suggesting that the situation is really, really unfair to us, because the countries of Europe have declined to let the SM and CU fall apart to accommodate the wish of certain Brexiters to be able to cut deals with individual EU countries?
I'm sure you're not saying that, because that would be utterly childish and you're not utterly childish. But in that case, I haven't got a scooby what you are saying.
-
I am saying that I think other EU countries would love to trade with us after we leave if they were allowed to.
-
HA. On the same topic, I think you've got a bit of a misunderstanding going on when you say "...immediately after the result was announced, the EU forbid any other member state to begin trade talks with the UK, despite a number of countries wanting to begin their own trade negotiations immediately."
Countries that are members of the CU and SM could not unilaterally have trade negotiations with us. That's the whole point of the CU and SM. You cede your power to make individual deals with third countries and in return you get the huge benefit of unrestricted trade with 450million of the wealthiest people who have ever lived, right on your doorstep.
If France, say, decided that they wanted to do an individual deal with Brazil, say, on terms that were not the same as the agreement that the EU has with Brazil, that would bring the whole CU and SM down. Because then France would be an entrepot for goods that weren't SM compliant, and France would be unilaterally making deals that gave them preferential terms on things like tarrifs, compared with how the rest of the EU could trade with Brazil.
So, if you are in a CU and SM, you CANNOT make trade deals with other countries.
So, there was never any question of EU countries INDIVIDUALLY making deals with the UK, wanting to do so or being stopped from doing so.
The thing you are talking about was something different. The UK negotiators, led by Davies, wanted to have individual discussions with the Govts of the EU countries on what the terms of the deal between the UK and the EU should be. There's a phrase for that. It's called "divide and rule". offer each country something in order for them to push behind the scenes to get the EU negotiators to give us a deal where we got all the benefits but none of the constraints of membership of the CU and SM.
But is WE got that, then, understandably, every other country would want that deal.
But if EVERY country got that deal, then the SM and CU and all their benefits would cease to exist.
So ALL the EU countries agreed that they would not have unilateral discussions with us. because they saw where it would lead. They agreed that the negotiations would be between the UK and the EU countries COLLECTIVELY represented by EU negotiators.
I'm genuinely baffled why you think that is some sort of nefarious action.
-
I am saying that I think other EU countries would love to trade with us after we leave if they were allowed to.
That's also what David Davies thought until he was put right too. Because they are not. And they can't.
-
BB
Do you REALLY not get this concept that membership of a club comes with conditions and restrictions as well as benefits? The EU countries have FREELY given up the right to make trade deals independently, for the benefit of having entirely unrestricted trade with each other.
If EU countries wanted to make independent trade deals with us, they could do so easily. By leaving the EU, the CU and the SM. there is absolutely nothing stopping them. Apart from the knowledge that they'd be cutting their own economic throats.
-
AL
As numerous people have noted, that was the problem with the Referendum in 2016..
Leave was a single, well defined outcome.
Leave was an umbrella term that covered dozens of potential outcomes.
There was never and there still isn't anything remotely close to a majority for a No Deal Brexit. That was barely even discussed in 2016 and it certainly wasn't advocated by the Leave campaign.
Leaving on those terms would be the ultimate perversion of the Referendum result.
No need to worry though agent May has done a cracking job of creating such a rotten deal that we will probably end up staying in, either officially or by any other name. More decades of misery and serfdom to come...
That's it though, you can't call it a bad deal from May if you wanted to leave without specifying the kind of leave you wanted. May has given you leave, accept her leave and move on. ;)
-
I think, for what my unqualified guess is worth, that The EU is making an example of us because they fear that if we get a fair deal other countries would want a referendum on their membership.
-
HA
The benefit is that we have unfettered access to the biggest and richest economic market in world history.
That's how things work. You choose ceding a certain amount of choice for the economic benefits.
And that's before you factor in what a right-wing Govt would do in this country if it was entirely free to make its own political decisions. On stuff like working conditions. Holiday pay. Maternity leave. Environmental regulations. Etc etc.
Billy,
So you’re saying that the UK doesn’t benefit from political interference from the EU, however it’s the price we pay for economic trade?
-
BB
So you just ignore everything I've just written then?
What is it that is UNfair about the deal that we have got?
-
HA. On the same topic, I think you've got a bit of a misunderstanding going on when you say "...immediately after the result was announced, the EU forbid any other member state to begin trade talks with the UK, despite a number of countries wanting to begin their own trade negotiations immediately."
Countries that are members of the CU and SM could not unilaterally have trade negotiations with us. That's the whole point of the CU and SM. You cede your power to make individual deals with third countries and in return you get the huge benefit of unrestricted trade with 450million of the wealthiest people who have ever lived, right on your doorstep.
If France, say, decided that they wanted to do an individual deal with Brazil, say, on terms that were not the same as the agreement that the EU has with Brazil, that would bring the whole CU and SM down. Because then France would be an entrepot for goods that weren't SM compliant, and France would be unilaterally making deals that gave them preferential terms on things like tarrifs, compared with how the rest of the EU could trade with Brazil.
So, if you are in a CU and SM, you CANNOT make trade deals with other countries.
So, there was never any question of EU countries INDIVIDUALLY making deals with the UK, wanting to do so or being stopped from doing so.
The thing you are talking about was something different. The UK negotiators, led by Davies, wanted to have individual discussions with the Govts of the EU countries on what the terms of the deal between the UK and the EU should be. There's a phrase for that. It's called "divide and rule". offer each country something in order for them to push behind the scenes to get the EU negotiators to give us a deal where we got all the benefits but none of the constraints of membership of the CU and SM.
But is WE got that, then, understandably, every other country would want that deal.
But if EVERY country got that deal, then the SM and CU and all their benefits would cease to exist.
So ALL the EU countries agreed that they would not have unilateral discussions with us. because they saw where it would lead. They agreed that the negotiations would be between the UK and the EU countries COLLECTIVELY represented by EU negotiators.
I'm genuinely baffled why you think that is some sort of nefarious action.
Billy,
You’re right, I misunderstood this specific point.
However, what the EU did do is attempt to stop the U.K. from beginning trade negotiations with nations outside the EU. This is technically correct, but is it in the spirit of collaborative negotiation?
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
-
HA
The benefit is that we have unfettered access to the biggest and richest economic market in world history.
That's how things work. You choose ceding a certain amount of choice for the economic benefits.
And that's before you factor in what a right-wing Govt would do in this country if it was entirely free to make its own political decisions. On stuff like working conditions. Holiday pay. Maternity leave. Environmental regulations. Etc etc.
Billy,
So you’re saying that the UK doesn’t benefit from political interference from the EU, however it’s the price we pay for economic trade?
HA
I'm saying that the UK cedes some of it's freedom to make its own decisions, for the benefit of greatly improved economic conditions.
That's the UK as an entity. You can call that "political interference" if you choose.
I'm also saying that individual working class people benefit massively from that "political interference" compared to what they would get in an alternative universe where a Tory Govt was free to decide on things like maternity pay, environmental conditions and everything else I listed. I know there's this argument from the Left that the EU's interference prevents us marching off to a socialist utopia. But as (I think) a left-leaning person, I'm sure you appreciate that there have been Tory Govts in this country for 29 of the 46 years since we joined the EEC/EC/EU.
-
HA.
No it did NOT stop us from conducting trade negotiations with countries outside the EU. What do you think Liam Foz has been jetting off round the world doing for the past 30 months?
What it stopped us from doing was SIGNING trade deals with other countries, whilever we were still members of the SM and CU. Just as it prevents every other EU country from doing.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
-
HA.
No it did NOT stop us from conducting trade negotiations with countries outside the EU. What do you think Liam Foz has been jetting off round the world doing for the past 30 months?
What it stopped us from doing was SIGNING trade deals with other countries, whilever we were still members of the SM and CU. Just as it prevents every other EU country from doing.
Billy
You’re wrong
On 27th September the EU Trade Commisioner Cecilia Maelstrom was asked in an interview whether the U.K. were allowed to legally negotiate deals that would be ready to go in 2019. She said
“It is very clear that as long as they are a member they cannot negotiate a trade agreement on their own.”
-
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Good question HA. I suggest you read the article I have linked to and then get back to me.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
Same here BB. I voted to leave and, while I knew we’d have to pay something, I thought that we’d then just walk away. My suspicions were raised when, immediately after the result was announced, the EU forbid any other member state to begin trade talks with the UK, despite a number of countries wanting to begin their own trade negotiations immediately.
No, you found out about it after the referendum. It's always been written into the terms of EU trade negotiations that the EU negotiates as a bloc and not individually. You're blaming the EU for your own ignorance.
-
BST. If you feel the club you are a member of is not worth the benefit because of the conditions and restrictions then you should have the right to leave. We were given that right and voted to leave.
What do you think to Theresa May's deal?
-
I think there's something lost in translation there HA. Fox has been negotiating for two years.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Because we'd need the other side to do so as well? And that's in the best circumstances, when the other signatory isn't going to use the opportunity to screw us when we don't have the economic weight of the EU behind us and because we'll be more desperate than them for a trade deal....because we're going to lose trade treaties with just about the whole world: they ain't.
-
BB
Now we're getting somewhere.
Do you agree that, if you leave a club, (especially after bad mouthing the committee for 30 years) and then ask if you can continue to use the cheap bar in the clubhouse, the committee might be within its rights to ask you to pay your subs and stick to the dress code?
May's deal? It's a shambles. It gives us a worse economic situation than we currently have while requiring us to follow most of the rules. But have no say in them.
But that's the best deal you're going to get if you insist on leaving. The alternative of leaving with No Deal would be calamitous.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Because we'd need the other side to do so as well? And that's in the best circumstances.
I don't do emojis, but if I did, there'd be one of someone banging their head against a wall here.
HA
Do you really think every country in the world is going to give us (a state of 65million people with a GDP of about £2trn) exactly the same terms that they gave the EU (450million, £12trn)?
Don't you think they might just probe our weak points and look for better terms for themselves?
-
BST, I don't think the leavers voted to remain in the bar, cheap beer or not. They wanted to leave without conditions.
-
So do you then agree that leave voters haven’t got what they voted for.? And that had the conditions for leaving been made clear at the time of voting, that would have been fairer regardless of the outcome.?
-
BST, I don't think the leavers voted to remain in the bar, cheap beer or not. They wanted to leave without conditions.
Then they've been suckered then, haven't they?
-
Of course the leave voters haven't got what they voted for. They voted to leave and they are being denied what they voted for. Not only has their choice to leave been replaced by a policy to only half leave, they are being threatened with another referendum that could result in not leaving at all.
-
I think there's something lost in translation there HA. Fox has been negotiating for two years.
The evidence is there for you Billy. A direct quote from the EU trade commissioner. If we have been negotiating then it’s clearly despite the EU regulations and not because of them
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Because we'd need the other side to do so as well? And that's in the best circumstances.
I don't do emojis, but if I did, there'd be one of someone banging their head against a wall here.
HA
Do you really think every country in the world is going to give us (a state of 65million people with a GDP of about £2trn) exactly the same terms that they gave the EU (450million, £12trn)?
Don't you think they might just probe our weak points and look for better terms for themselves?
Billy,
Your condescending, patronising and sometimes disrespectful attitude to any opinion that contradicts yours has worn thin. Do you not think that I read your posts and ‘want to bang my head against the wall?’ Of course I do, regularly. However, I respect yours and other people’s opinions. You may be right or I may be right but do you know what? Nobody, not even you has a real clue what’s going to happen. Yet, you seem unable to grasp this fact and sometimes, just occasionally Billy, when someone says something that you don’t like/agree with you come across as a self centred know all. Please, don’t be a smart arse with me.
This is one debate that I’m checking out of
-
I think there's something lost in translation there HA. Fox has been negotiating for two years.
The evidence is there for you Billy. A direct quote from the EU trade commissioner. If we have been negotiating then it’s clearly despite the EU regulations and not because of them
So they haven't stopped us then?
-
HA
I apologise if I've come across as a smart arse. If I have, it's the result of several years of engaging with this type of argument on an issue that is going to make this country a much worse place for my kids to grow up in.
Misinformed or misinterpreted arguments about what the EU does or doesn't do. About what our position in the world will be.
I've tried discussing this politely for a long time and rarely got engagement. So yeah, I'm letting my frustration boil over. Because I'm seeing no engagement from Leave supporters about the extent of the crisis that they have topped us into. Just repeats over and over and over again of zombie arguments. Ones that have been countered over and over and over again and which ought to have been killed off, but which keep being ressurected.
I was politely pointing out 2 years ago that there was no way that we could walk away from the EU without screwing up the Irish border issue. I was called a Remoaner. I was called a Project Fear monger. I was called a condescending t**t.
And here we are, two years later with people still insisting we should walk away and still not engaging with the facts.
So, to be honest, I'm tired of being polite.
-
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Because we'd need the other side to do so as well? And that's in the best circumstances.
I don't do emojis, but if I did, there'd be one of someone banging their head against a wall here.
HA
Do you really think every country in the world is going to give us (a state of 65million people with a GDP of about £2trn) exactly the same terms that they gave the EU (450million, £12trn)?
Don't you think they might just probe our weak points and look for better terms for themselves?
Billy,
Your condescending, patronising and sometimes disrespectful attitude to any opinion that contradicts yours has worn thin. Do you not think that I read your posts and ‘want to bang my head against the wall?’ Of course I do, regularly. However, I respect yours and other people’s opinions. You may be right or I may be right but do you know what? Nobody, not even you has a real clue what’s going to happen. Yet, you seem unable to grasp this fact and sometimes, just occasionally Billy, when someone says something that you don’t like/agree with you come across as a self centred know all. Please, don’t be a smart arse with me.
This is one debate that I’m checking out of
I thought we could leave without conditions. I thought the whole reason for leaving was to rid ourselves of conditions. Surely I wasn't alone in thinking this?
EXACTLY! It's not hard to understand is it?
And that I am afraid is where you bought the lie. When/if we leave the EU we dont actually leave one thing. What we actually will do is break 759 international treaties that we have negotiated as an EU member and we will not now be a party to as an non-EU member. Unless and until we re-negotiate them as an individual member. I posted a link on the other thread to a fascinating talk I attended recently about this.
These treaties cover vast swathes of our life on topics such as:
aircraft movement
use of the channel tunnel
movement of radioactive material (x-ray plates and power station fuel)
movement of medicines
movement of animals
access to fishing grounds
landing of fish
recognition of driving licences
access to criminal databases
Leaving the EU without a deal doesn't mean trading on WTO terms, it means normal life will stop.
https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
I assume that the U.K. was party to the negotiations on these treaties so why can’t we just ‘ copy and paste’ them as we have done with the trade deal with Japan?
Because we'd need the other side to do so as well? And that's in the best circumstances.
I don't do emojis, but if I did, there'd be one of someone banging their head against a wall here.
HA
Do you really think every country in the world is going to give us (a state of 65million people with a GDP of about £2trn) exactly the same terms that they gave the EU (450million, £12trn)?
Don't you think they might just probe our weak points and look for better terms for themselves?
Billy,
Your condescending, patronising and sometimes disrespectful attitude to any opinion that contradicts yours has worn thin. Do you not think that I read your posts and ‘want to bang my head against the wall?’ Of course I do, regularly. However, I respect yours and other people’s opinions. You may be right or I may be right but do you know what? Nobody, not even you has a real clue what’s going to happen. Yet, you seem unable to grasp this fact and sometimes, just occasionally Billy, when someone says something that you don’t like/agree with you come across as a self centred know all. Please, don’t be a smart arse with me.
This is one debate that I’m checking out of
Don't give in to bullys like that. He won't accept anyone elses opinion, but doesn't mean no one else will.
This forum needs balance from his self centred, narrow minded ramblings.
-
HA
I apologise if I've come across as a smart arse. If I have, it's the result of several years of engaging with this type of argument on a issue that is going to make this country a much worse place for my kids to grow up in.
Misinformed or misinterpreted arguments about what the EU does or doesn't do. About what our position in the world will be.
I've tried discussing this politely for a long time and rarely got engagement. So yeah, I'm letting my frustration boil over. Because I'm seeing no engagement from Leave supporters about the extent of the crisis that they have topped us into. Just repeats over and over and over again of zombie arguments. Ones that have been countered over and over and over again and which ought to have been killed off, but which keep being ressurected.
I was politely pointing out 2 years ago that there was no way that we could walk away from the EU without screwing up the Irish border issue. I was called a Remoaner. I was called a Project Fear monger. I was called a condescending t**t.
And here we are, two years later with people still insisting we should walk away and still not engaging with the facts.
So, to be honest, I'm tired of being polite.
Not f**king once have you been polite,
You refuse to accept any opinion that differs to your self centred, narrow minded, over inflated opinions.
When someone disagrees with you, you attack and bully them, they eventually give in. Because they simply don't have the time and energy to argue with a non-entity on an off topic football forum.
Which leads me to believe this is your only outlet, perhaps if you engaged in debate in the real world, you may come to accept that people have an opinion that differs to your own .
-
To defend BST his posts are littered with evidence from everywhere to back up his argument.
Yours are just you flying by the seat of your pants.
-
BS
Go back and look through the other thread. To the bit where we, you and I, talked about the need to be civil in the discussions.
And in the very next post, you called someone who disagreed with you a Remoaner.
And I asked you to stop using that term. And you continued over and over and over again.
Don't come the moral high ground act now.
-
Everyone is entitled to an opinion
But then they must be able to defend that opinion or change it when it is clear that that opinion is built on sand
That's what debate is all about
Which is why we have information to enable decision making
But sometimes hindsight is the acid test
-
There's a big difference between respecting someone's right to hold an opinion (which is a right that everyone has) and respecting the opinion.
I think this is where the confusion stems from.
No one has the right to demand that their opinion is respected. You earn that right by justifying it against facts. And the to-ing and fro-ing of arguing the case can get a bit robust.
It's a pretty basic tenet of being an adult that if you have an opinion, you need to be prepared to defend it.
Alternatively, if someone argues with your opinion, you can call them a Remoaner Billy No Mates if it makes you feel better.
-
To be fair there are far more offensive posters than BST. He does get hot under the collar like the rest of us, but his conduct is generally acceptable, unlike some whose default setting starts at disrespectful.
-
You can b*llocks with the soft soap BB.
-
I didn't say you were good, BST, I just said that others were worse.
I'm good.
-
Like I said. You can b*llocks.
-
Yes, you're right BST. It didn't feel right agreeing with you.
b*llocks!
-
It WAS one of the more unnerving experiences I've had in here BB.
Keep your b*llocks out of it though. You won't win that one.
-
I actually stuck up for you once in here. Someone told me you weren't fit to sleep with Maggie Thatcher. I told 'em you were.
-
Aye. I'd rather argue with her than you thought. She was a bit less intransigent.
-
It's not really me that you have to convince. Remember I voted to remain. I'm trying to make the best of a democratic decision. We are all leavers until someone says different and we'd be better going forward united, that's all.
-
I know you did BB, but every post since has suggested your heart is really with Leave.
I don't get this united thing. Uniting over what. I believe in my core that the Leave vote is the biggest mistake we've made in 80 years and I'm not going to stop thinking that.
Doesn't change the hours I put in to help the economy. And I wouldn't put any more in if I shrugged my shoulders and said "Ah f**k it then".
Here's a thought though. My company is just about to sign a deal with an American client for £200k of work over the next 2 years. I've bust my arse to secure that, including three trips over there.
If the Treasury and BoE forecasts are correct, that we'll lose 10% of GDP if we had a No Deal Brexit, the country would need 3million such deals on top of normal business to make up the loss.
Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical about just keeping schtum and uniting as the way forward.
-
Right-o' glad that's sorted, if you're a paid up member of the club you get cheap beer and your kids can go to the xmas party.
-
What is missing from this discussion is an understanding of human psychology, specifically how people form opinions and hold them.
This link from the pollsters offers a basic outline;
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/facts-may-have-changed-brexit-peoples-minds-have-not
I do think some have moved since 2016, but loading them up with data and counter arguments is unlikely to prove persuasive.
If you made your mind up because you distrust the political class, or are skeptical about arguments too complicated for many, then more of the same from the usual suspects is unlikely to cut the mustard.
-
I get that argument Albie. But what's the conclusion?
That we should stop making evidence-based arguments? Appeal to gut instinct?
That terrifies me. It's the road to Hell as far as I can see. Because there's always some charismatic psychopath who comes along and knows what message to put out to push folks' buttons.
Hitler and Stalin are the obvious ones but there are plenty more waiting in the wings for when evidence-based democracy collapses.
Putin's there already.
Trump's trying but I have faith in American democracy to bring him down.
In Europe, there's Orban and LePen and Kaczynski and Salvini and our own dear Nigel.
I was having this argument just the other day with a left wing mate of mine who is a company managing director and university professor. Very smart. Very successful. He was insisting that the Left has to get down in the gutter with the populist Right. Forget about arguing based on facts and figures. Use propaganda, like Farage did with the migrant posters in 2016 to put fire in people's bellies.
It scares the living shit out of me. Because once you stop accepting facts as the benchmark and start appealing to instinct, this wonderful, peaceful, productive 70 years we've just had can vanish in a f**king instant.
-
BST,
I am not saying you disregard the evidence base, but there are important presentational issues to keep in mind.
If people feel that their opinions are discounted, and hold fears about the way that the political establishment conducts itself in a top down fashion.
The risk is sounding like authority figures saying "keep up", and then resentment forms an additional barrier.
Perhaps it is better to accept the issues that worry people, and look to offer solutions that make sense to that perspective (even if you think that view is wrong).
You ask "Whats the Conclusion"....well first you need to recognise we have reached an impasse.
We could do worse than consider "deliberative democracy" approaches to insolubles like Brexit.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/richard-s-forsyth/peoples-vote-without-referendum
This is controversial, but lets face the fact that the current system is counter productive.
If anyone has a better suggestion, lets hear it!
It is about giving value to experience other than your own, and making identity distinct from opinion.
What that boils down to is saying changing your opinion is OK, and does not conflict with your sense of self.
Your disagreement with Boomstick on here is an example of digging in behind the trenches.
Not every nut needs a sledgehammer!
-
I now have dual Nationality ..phew!
Envoyé de mon EVA-L09 en utilisant Tapatalk
-
You can't leave a f**king phone contract without lengthy negotiations and a fee to pay. Why on earth would anyone think an entire country could just up and leave a decades-old trading bloc with thousands of complex rules, regulations, and trade deals in place - without first settling all the commitments we've previously agreed to? Anyone who says they don't understand this either genuinely doesn't understand it or does understand it and is lying to you, but either way, they've forfeited their seat at the grown-up discussion table.
Typical condescending remainiac.
I'm so clever and I know everything...
-
What this country need is a Putin or an Orban to take charge and drag us from the gutter and shackles of EU slavery.
I'm sick of hearing about business and finance. I voted leave for the benefit of the nation, not for short sighted personal benefit. There's more to life than money.
-
You can't leave a f**king phone contract without lengthy negotiations and a fee to pay. Why on earth would anyone think an entire country could just up and leave a decades-old trading bloc with thousands of complex rules, regulations, and trade deals in place - without first settling all the commitments we've previously agreed to? Anyone who says they don't understand this either genuinely doesn't understand it or does understand it and is lying to you, but either way, they've forfeited their seat at the grown-up discussion table.
Typical condescending remainiac.
I'm so clever and I know everything...
Funny how people pointing out what should be fairly obvious is condescending now...
-
What this country need is a Putin or an Orban to take charge and drag us from the gutter and shackles of EU slavery.
I'm sick of hearing about business and finance. I voted leave for the benefit of the nation, not for short sighted personal benefit. There's more to life than money.
What benefits would those be?
Were they clear and measurable at the time of the referendum, were they weighed up against the downside of leaving.?
I get it, people voted to have a UK independent of the EU - as a principle and that is understandable. However what wasn’t known was how things would work in practice, not in principle..
I am repeating myself here, but a defined Brexit deal at referendum time may have seen a bigger leave majority.. it might not but the whole thing would have been more clear and fairer.
This is a rolling goat f**k of the highest order..
-
Yep. That's what happens when you repeat yourself for 2 years and people still peddle the same old lies to you. I'll admit, I was condescending there. But funnily enough, when I make an effort to be reasonable - like when I asked several times how best to challenge lies and falsehoods - I never get a response. It's only when I tell someone to f**k off that they respond - it's almost as if they want to paint a picture of remainers as condescending and aggressive to suit a narrative, isn't it?
So I'll ask again: when someone comes up to you and lies to your face - intentionally or otherwise - how should you challenge it? Because you do need to. If someone comes up to you and tells you the grass is blue and the sky is green, and that if you disagree you're an unpatriotic moaning leftie and you should respect their opinion about the sky being green, how do you say "no, that's wrong"?
-
Are Remainers condescending and aggressive? Absolutely. So much so that as a remain voter myself I don't want to be part of them. I'd much rather argue against them than for them, and there are plenty of things to argue with them about.
Their attitude has definitely done no good for their cause.
-
BB
As I said last night, my own frustration comes from the total lack of substantive responses from leave supporters to four critical questions. If my insistence on asking those questions comes across as aggressive and condescending, that's unfortunate, but it's secondary. The consequences that spin out from ignoring these questions are so serious, that a few people having their egos bruised is utterly irrelevant.
The questions are:
1) Do you accept the opinion of the vast majority of economic analysts, that leaving the EU will make us significantly less wealthy as a country from a significant period of time (several % of GDP for more than 10 years) and if not, what do you base your opinion on?
2) Have you considered what the effect of that level of loss of economic output would be on the country as a whole and you personally, given that it is a significantly more severe economic contraction than any recession that we have experienced since the 1930s?
3) Do you accept that there is currently no way that we can leave the CU and SM that doesn't have a very serious effect on the NI border issue?
4) Why do you think Putin and Trump were the only major world statesmen to support Brexit, and do you think everyone else was part of some conspiracy to misinform you?
Any Leave supporter who has thought seriously about those three issues, has considered opinions on them and is prepared to argue the case will have my respect. Anyone who hasn't thought about them, or has an "It'll be reyt" reaction to them doesn't deserve to have their opinions taken seriously.
-
I voted leave for the benefit of the nation
Still waiting to leave how leaving will benefit the nation...
What this country need is a Putin or an Orban to take charge and drag us from the gutter and shackles of EU slavery.
ignoring this because your obviously on a wind up
-
BST, the lack of Leave voters response regarding the consequences of Brexit is because unlike many Remainers, they know that any future predictions are conjecture, and it would be hypocritical if they were to offer their expectations of the consequences of it as fact.
-
The most ignored leaving deal is Lexit. I am sick of being stuck with tags of association with "Tommy" Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon "Robinson" of EDL and UKIP infamy. No I wasn't too thick and therefore was taken in by phony immigration threats. I know the EU is not reformable and is a rich right wing club. Interestingly French train drivers are up in arms about plans to privatise SNCF as its all about market competition. We need a system where we can renationalise rail, water gas and electric - all popular with the public mood (train fares rising again in January to subsidise rail franchise profiteers- including the Dutch and German state railways). And if you think the EU protects workers rights you are dreaming back in the era of Delores, as consecutive UK, with no intervention from the EU, governments have eroded them further. We need to leave with the best deal possible for UK workers and rights.
If you think any renationalisation will be done under a Tory government that you are deluded!!
-
I voted leave for the benefit of the nation
Still waiting to leave how leaving will benefit the nation...
What this country need is a Putin or an Orban to take charge and drag us from the gutter and shackles of EU slavery.
All I need to know is that if banks and big business say we should stay in, then the best option is to get out.
These are the enemies of the people, who would rather pay some penniless roumanian two and sixpence to work all day in a field, and live ten to a caravan, rather than pay Brits a decent living wage. The globalist mafia will stop at nothing to keep us enslaved.
And no. I am not on a wind up regarding Putin and Orban.
ignoring this because your obviously on a wind up
-
BST, the lack of Leave voters response regarding the consequences of Brexit is because unlike many Remainers, they know that any future predictions are conjecture, and it would be hypocritical if they were to offer their expectations of the consequences of it as fact.
What about things that are happening now? Like the slumping pound, the stagnant economy, or the criminal investigations into foreign money and illegal data harvesting that were put into practice by a hostile foreign power to destabilise the country?
-
BB
But that's what grown ups do. We make predictions of the future based on the best information we have available. We don't walk into the future totally blind.
Wilfully deciding to ignore the best estimates of a large number of professional people in an issue THIS important is not something that any of us would do in our personal lives.
When you take out a mortgage, you don't know what the interest rates will be in the future. But you consider what likely scenarios are and what the consequences would be for your finances. You don't say "f**k it, who knows?" Or if you do, you're running a massive risk.
-
BST, the lack of Leave voters response regarding the consequences of Brexit is because unlike many Remainers, they know that any future predictions are conjecture, and it would be hypocritical if they were to offer their expectations of the consequences of it as fact.
What about things that are happening now? Like the slumping pound, the stagnant economy, or the criminal investigations into foreign money and illegal data harvesting that were put into practice by a hostile foreign power to destabilise the country?
Yet it's people who want a second vote that are undemocratic.
-
Here's a figure to think about.
Every 1% of GDP growth that we lose and don't recover would leave us £1trn worse off as a country over a decade.
1% GDP growth loss is the MINIMUM that is being predicted. And even the staunchest Brexit supporters accept that it would take us a decade to see serious benefits from enhanced trade with the rest of the world (although none of them say how these benefits would come about).
£1trn is about £35,000 for every employed person in the country.
£1trn would pay for about 4million new houses.
£1trn would pay for a replacement of the entire motorway network. Twice a year. For a decade.
£1trn would pay for 2000 new infirmaries.
That is the MINIMUM we'll lose over a decade as a result of the very most optimistic Brexit scenarios.
Do you REALLY want to shrug your shoulders and just assume all the predictions are wrong?
-
Here's a figure to think about.
Every 1% of GDP growth that we lose and don't recover would leave us £1trn worse off as a country over a decade.
1% GDP growth loss is the MINIMUM that is being predicted. And even the staunchest Brexit supporters accept that it would take us a decade to see serious benefits from enhanced trade with the rest of the world (although none of them say how these benefits would come about).
£1trn is about £35,000 for every employed person in the country.
£1trn would pay for about 4million new houses.
£1trn would pay for a replacement of the entire motorway network. Twice a year. For a decade.
£1trn would pay for 2000 new infirmaries.
That is the MINIMUM we'll lose over a decade as a result of the very most optimistic Brexit scenarios.
Do you REALLY want to shrug your shoulders and just assume all the predictions are wrong?
Please tell me you're not suggesting we should be building more houses?
-
Of course we need more housing. We have a national crisis with lack of good quality low cost housing.
Although at the risk of sounding condescending, you're kind of missing the point.
-
Of course we need more housing. We have a national crisis with lack of good quality low cost housing.
Although at the risk of sounding condescending, you're kind of missing the point.
I get your point about what the money could be used for, however I don't want anymore houses built around where I live, especially affordable ones. Maybe less people would solve the housing 'crisis'. Maybe if the younger generation could make do without I-phones, foreign holidays, designer clothes and new cars they might just be able to afford to buy a house?
-
Do you actually live in the real world.?
I know several young people like you describe and iPhones aside, they don’t have new cars nor go on expensive holidays, and saving for a mortgage deposit is very difficult, never mind getting a mortgage approved..
-
Do you actually live in the real world.?
I know several young people like you describe and iPhones aside, they don’t have new cars nor go on expensive holidays, and saving for a mortgage deposit is very difficult, never mind getting a mortgage approved..
I saved up for everything I've got on a joe bloggs wage packet. The problem with the majority of the youth is that they want everything now. I work in a company where three youngsters around 19-20 years of wage passed their test and went straight into brand new motors on pcp. The age of buying an old mini with the door hanging off for a monkey for your first motor has gone.
-
I agree with you to a degree that some of the youth today expect the world to give them a living..
-
Considering we haven't even left the EU yet, is the present financial situation more a result of future uncertainty than an actual effect of Brexit?
-
Considering we haven't even left the EU yet, is the present financial situation more a result of future uncertainty than an actual effect of Brexit?
I would have thought that people’s thoughts of an uncertain financial future is because of the possibility of us leaving the EU.
It is an actual effect of a possible Brexit.
-
BB
No. It's the result of
1) the sharp increase in inflation in 2016-17, which itself was due to
2) the sharp fall in the pound immediately after the referendum which itself was due to
3) the concern of international markets about the future strength of the UK economy, which has been exacerbated by
4) a very sharp reduction in capital investment by companies based in the UK, due to the concern that we'll have significantly less access to the EU markets.
All predictable.
All predicted.
How many predictions do you need to see that are proved right by the facts before you start to pay attention to the ongoing predictions?
-
BST. You give a one-word answer 'No', and then go on to confirm what I suggested!
-
Do you actually live in the real world.?
I know several young people like you describe and iPhones aside, they don’t have new cars nor go on expensive holidays, and saving for a mortgage deposit is very difficult, never mind getting a mortgage approved..
I saved up for everything I've got on a joe bloggs wage packet. The problem with the majority of the youth is that they want everything now. I work in a company where three youngsters around 19-20 years of wage passed their test and went straight into brand new motors on pcp. The age of buying an old mini with the door hanging off for a monkey for your first motor has gone.
What a load of tosh. No doubt there are some people like that but you can't tar "the majority of youth" with the same brush as 3 people at your work.
-
No BB
It's not the result of future "uncertainty".
There IS uncertainty in the economic consequences of Brexit because we don't know what sort of Brexit we'll have. But it's not that uncertainty that is causing the economic slowdown.
The slowdown is the result of considered predictions of the LIKELIHOOD of what is going to happen.
The uncertainty is in whether the economic effect of leaving will be bad, very bad or catastrophic.
You seem to live in a world where, because we cannot predict precisely what will happen in the future, we shouldn't make any attempt to estimate what will happen.
How do you go about crossing the road? Surely you can't be certain that some idiot won't come round the corner at 100mph and wipe you out?
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
-
BB
Yes. If you insist. It is just like that.
-
Considering we haven't even left the EU yet, is the present financial situation more a result of future uncertainty than an actual effect of Brexit?
Nah it's Corbyn's fault. I read it on here ages ago.....
-
Re-read the posts over the last couple of pages and one can easily see the tenuous grip on reality that brexiters have with desperate posts no links to credible sources and arguments just for the sake of it. Apologies if this post sounds a little condescending but if you don't believe me read the posts.
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
NAIL ON HEAD .
Remoaners bleet on about treason. But I say it's THEM that's being treasonous by trying to derail brexit. Much more damaging.
I said along time ago, this is a time when we should all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
-
Gina Miller went to court to ensure Article 50 was enacted by Parliament, the law of the land upheld her case. The definition of sabotage now apparently includes using the laws of the land to uphold the sovereignty of Parliament, that's why it's so hard to understand what Brexiteers are arguing from when they misrepresent what happened, it's called a fact.
-
I voted to leave because I didn't want to be part of a federal Europe although reluctant to leave many of the other benefits behind.
I have not seen any politician on the leave side look remotely capable of managing any sort of deal acceptable or workable to most people.
I have lost all faith in most politicians and their childish antics.
The Russian money and Facebook scandal coupled with the antics of Putin and Trump leave us needing as many allies as possible. That is financially and politically. I would now like to see us stay in the EU and fight any changes not acceptable to us from the inside.
We have now wasted more than two years on this shambles, let's move quickly to put things right.
-
If the EU want us to stay in why haven't they offered us changes to make remaining more acceptable already?
-
If the EU want us to stay in why haven't they offered us changes to make remaining more acceptable already?
There are some amongst the Remainers who think that deciding to stay in, whether via a Referendum or via Parliament calling the whole thing off, should be a prelude to us renegotiating the terms of our membership.
I'd have thought the last two years prove that to be as big a delusional fantasy as anything peddled by hard Brexiteers. If we stay in, we accept the EU warts and all, and if we're lucky we might retain some of the concessions we already have - eg staying out of the Euro and keeping the rebate.
The time for attempts at renegotiation surely ended with Cameron's half-hearted attempts before 2016.
-
I think idler has made a very good point.. voting to leave on a matter of principle and then being let down by the politicians..
I agree it is better to stay in and argue our case as part of the club..
Does that make idler a remoaner.? Not in my book it doesn’t, it’s an honest appraisal of the unfortunate reality we are now faced with..
-
Gina Miller went to court to ensure Article 50 was enacted by Parliament, the law of the land upheld her case. The definition of sabotage now apparently includes using the laws of the land to uphold the sovereignty of Parliament, that's why it's so hard to understand what Brexiteers are arguing from when they misrepresent what happened, it's called a fact.
So you're telling me that Gina Miller and her millionaire chums are concerned for the welfare of the average British worker? All the likes of that lot are concerned with is how little they get away with paying us, or employ an eastern European instead. That's one thing they got right in the Russian revolution sorting the likes of her!
-
She wants to in the EU which protects workers' rights, leaving will lead to deregulation of the ordinary workers' rights. What about the fact you called her lawful pursuit sabotage?
-
Gina Miller went to court to ensure Article 50 was enacted by Parliament, the law of the land upheld her case. The definition of sabotage now apparently includes using the laws of the land to uphold the sovereignty of Parliament, that's why it's so hard to understand what Brexiteers are arguing from when they misrepresent what happened, it's called a fact.
So you're telling me that Gina Miller and her millionaire chums are concerned for the welfare of the average British worker? All the likes of that lot are concerned with is how little they get away with paying us, or employ an eastern European instead. That's one thing they got right in the Russian revolution sorting the likes of her!
Gina Miller
She has been a leading campaigner against hidden charges in pensions and investment and what she has described as "flagrant mis-selling within the asset management market". She set up Miller Philanthropy (now rebranded the True and Fair Foundation) in 2009, and established MoneyShe.com in 2014, as a female-focused investment brand.[10][15]
True and Fair Campaign
In January 2012,[19][25] she set up the True and Fair Campaign, with the stated aim to "limit the possibility of future mis-selling or financial scandals through greater transparency."[17] This initiative attracted the animosity of part of the City, earning her the nickname of "black widow spider".[20] She reported being called "a disgrace [whose] lobbying efforts would bring down the entire City",[16] and the Daily Mail reported that she had been criticised because her firm SCM had not disclosed the size of the fund it is managing for its clients.[26][27]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Miller
How selfish can you get eh.
-
She wants to in the EU which protects workers' rights, leaving will lead to deregulation of the ordinary workers' rights. What about the fact you called her lawful pursuit sabotage?
She was a front for big business trying to throw a spanner in the works.
-
If the EU want us to stay in why haven't they offered us changes to make remaining more acceptable already?
Because our Prime Minister has made it clear to them from Day 1 that "The people have spoken" and "Brexit means Brexit".
-
The Prime minister is like an alcoholic in denial , and need s to face reality.
how many times does she have to be told ?
Theresa May does not have many cards to play as she approaches next week’s crunch Commons vote on her Brexit deal. One of the few to hand is the argument that British business supports the draft pact she has signed with the EU. However, things are not as positive as the prime minister and her advisers might like.
The Harvard report, based on interviews with small and medium-sized businesses, academics and trade associations, takes a different view. It suggests that a lot of SMEs are much less enthusiastic about the May deal than is the CBI.
As the Harvard report says: “Most companies want more detail, less uncertainty, and a greater guarantee of future proximity to the EU than the government’s proposals offer.”
It says that for most companies “the May deal is inferior to remaining in the EU or moving more decisively to a much closer relationship with the EU that includes continued participation in the Single Market and flexible access to EU skills and labour”.
-
The fact that people on here think that their fellow countrymen WANT the country to fail shows the pit that we are in.
It is an appalling state of affairs and deeply depressing.
Of COURSE I don't want the f**king country to fail. What a stupid thing to think. If there was any way that we could leave the EU and be a happier, fairer and stronger country, I'd jump at it. No one has given any indication how any of that is possible. The hole that we're in now is so deep that it's a question of finding the least bad way out.
Beyond belief that people genuinely think that we want the country to fail so we can say "told you so."
Grow up.
-
BB
Are you suggesting that an organisation of nearly 500 million should make fundamental changes because of the attitudes of 17 million people, many of whom don't actually seem to know what it does?
-
I think idler has made a very good point.. voting to leave on a matter of principle and then being let down by the politicians..
I agree it is better to stay in and argue our case as part of the club..
Does that make idler a remoaner.? Not in my book it doesn’t, it’s an honest appraisal of the unfortunate reality we are now faced with..
Except the real let down by politicians wasn't the one AFTER the vote (as inept as that has been).
It was the politicians BEFORE the vote, beguiling people into thinking that we could leave the EU AND be richer, safer, happier.
It was bullshit from Day 1, peddled by bas**rds with a history of bullshitting, from Farage, through Johnson, Gove, Fox and Redwood.
A bunch of lying shysters, the lot of them. Everything they said was lies from Turkey joining the EU, to the £350m claim, to the deal that we could demand, to the insistence that experts who pointed out their lies were bent.
They whipped up expectations that could never be satisfied and we're all paying for it now.
Whatever the final outcome, we are a more fractured society as a result of their egos, ambitions and f**king stupidity and that will take decades to correct.
-
BB
Are you suggesting that an organisation of nearly 500 million should make fundamental changes because of the attitudes of 17 million people, many of whom don't actually seem to know what it does?
No BST, I'm suggesting the EU should make changes to make it more possible so that 63 million people - more than 13% of the EU membership, may decide to stay.
-
BB
Are you suggesting that an organisation of nearly 500 million should make fundamental changes because of the attitudes of 17 million people, many of whom don't actually seem to know what it does?
Don't take this the wrong way, but who are the likes of Malta, Luxembourg, Lithuania and the rest to dictate too us?
Some pay in and some take out...
-
Why should Scotland and Wales have a say in the parliament which looks after England.?
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
NAIL ON HEAD .
Remoaners bleet on about treason. But I say it's THEM that's being treasonous by trying to derail brexit. Much more damaging.
I said along time ago, this is a time when we should all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
Good of the country?
Every single economic forecast says that Brexit will damage the country.
Surely if we're pulling together for the good of the country, then we should all be pulling for Remaining in the EU.
-
I prefer his: a movement led by hedge fund millionaires, city bankers and the aristocratic elite, such as Jacob Rees--Mogg, John Redwood, Ian Duncan Smith, Lord Digby Jones, Nigel Farage and Alexander Boris dePfellel Johnson, funded by American billionaires and Russian oligarchs, represents the British working class more than every trade union and the people saying a no-deal Brexit will lead to the collapse of manufacturing and agriculture! Some support is that!
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
NAIL ON HEAD .
Remoaners bleet on about treason. But I say it's THEM that's being treasonous by trying to derail brexit. Much more damaging.
I said along time ago, this is a time when we should all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
Good of the country?
Every single economic forecast says that Brexit will damage the country.
Surely if we're pulling together for the good of the country, then we should all be pulling for Remaining in the EU.
No, we voted to LEAVE. it's HAPPENING.
the sooner remainers accept this, then we can all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
-
BB
Are you suggesting that an organisation of nearly 500 million should make fundamental changes because of the attitudes of 17 million people, many of whom don't actually seem to know what it does?
Don't take this the wrong way, but who are the likes of Malta, Luxembourg, Lithuania and the rest to dictate too us?
Some pay in and some take out...
They are equal members of the EU
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
NAIL ON HEAD .
Remoaners bleet on about treason. But I say it's THEM that's being treasonous by trying to derail brexit. Much more damaging.
I said along time ago, this is a time when we should all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
Good of the country?
Every single economic forecast says that Brexit will damage the country.
Surely if we're pulling together for the good of the country, then we should all be pulling for Remaining in the EU.
No, we voted to LEAVE. it's HAPPENING.
the sooner remainers accept this, then we can all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
So tell what you know bs, when, how and why or have you been in negotiations with Axeholm?
-
BB
Are you suggesting that an organisation of nearly 500 million should make fundamental changes because of the attitudes of 17 million people, many of whom don't actually seem to know what it does?
Don't take this the wrong way, but who are the likes of Malta, Luxembourg, Lithuania and the rest to dictate too us?
Some pay in and some take out...
I got the impression you thought every country was equally under the jackboot of the fascist bullyboys that are the EU?
-
BB
What changes would you like the EU to make?
-
So it's a bit like saying last July that more Rovers' season tickets would have been sold had it not been for the likelihood of a disastrous season brought on by the appointment of Grant McCann.
Had season tickets been undersold as a result McCann's appointment it would have been merely because of his appointment and not his actual effect on the team.
Who knows, with the extra backing of the doubters perhaps the extra season ticket sales would have made him even more successful.
I believe many remainers want Britain to fail so they can say 'I told you so'. If people had started from a position of wanting Britain to succeed rather than rubbishing the nation at every verse end, and telling us how much we need the EU things may have been better. The EU have sensed the weakness and division in Britain and used it to their advantage.
The result should have been accepted and everyone should have pulled together, instead of the treacherous sabotage of the likes of the vile Gina Miller and her big business cronies. Such people do not care a jot about the British working class.
NAIL ON HEAD .
Remoaners bleet on about treason. But I say it's THEM that's being treasonous by trying to derail brexit. Much more damaging.
I said along time ago, this is a time when we should all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
Good of the country?
Every single economic forecast says that Brexit will damage the country.
Surely if we're pulling together for the good of the country, then we should all be pulling for Remaining in the EU.
No, we voted to LEAVE. it's HAPPENING.
the sooner remainers accept this, then we can all pull in the same direction for the good of our country.
This debate here isn’t about “we voted to leave - end of” though, it’s about how we make the leaving actually work..
It’s not about the overal principle of leaving the EU, but all the arrangements for practical issues..
Staying in the EU would have retained order, clearly not to just enough of the electorate’s dislike, but order and an understanding of where we are at..
Leaving, as it is now, is chaos.. did the leave voters want chaos?
We already lost one PM to this debacle and in all honesty we should lose another..
Don’t get me wrong, I like anarchy in the uk, but only the song.!
-
Imagine if the French Government had behaved like our Government over the last two years, it would n’t be just Paris rioting
-
BST. I'd like an Australian style points system where we prioritise people who benefit us most.
-
So you want the EU to do away with freedom of movement?
-
An interesting read:https://briefingsforbrexit.com/a-letter-to-remainers-by-dr-graham-gudgin/
-
So you want the EU to do away with freedom of movement?
Do I? Read my post again.
-
Heard this on radio 4 this morning, unfortunately did not catch the name of the chap speaking but he suggested a way forward which would maybe be acceptable to all and break through the current stalemate
He suggested a second referendum, but only a referendum on how we leave.
The first referendum result stands and we still leave, however the second one is a decision between no deal, deal, etc. Maybe a way forward, as at the moment no-one is happy, at least this way everyone thinks they are gaining something?
Stands back and prepares for verbal assault. :)
-
Heard this on radio 4 this morning, unfortunately did not catch the name of the chap speaking but he suggested a way forward which would maybe be acceptable to all and break through the current stalemate
He suggested a second referendum, but only a referendum on how we leave.
The first referendum result stands and we still leave, however the second one is a decision between no deal, deal, etc. Maybe a way forward, as at the moment no-one is happy, at least this way everyone thinks they are gaining something?
Stands back and prepares for verbal assault. :)
Cracking idea, let's see the remainers moan about that
-
Heard this on radio 4 this morning, unfortunately did not catch the name of the chap speaking but he suggested a way forward which would maybe be acceptable to all and break through the current stalemate
He suggested a second referendum, but only a referendum on how we leave.
The first referendum result stands and we still leave, however the second one is a decision between no deal, deal, etc. Maybe a way forward, as at the moment no-one is happy, at least this way everyone thinks they are gaining something?
Stands back and prepares for verbal assault. :)
Cracking idea, let's see the remainers moan about that
They will...
-
Heard this on radio 4 this morning, unfortunately did not catch the name of the chap speaking but he suggested a way forward which would maybe be acceptable to all and break through the current stalemate
He suggested a second referendum, but only a referendum on how we leave.
The first referendum result stands and we still leave, however the second one is a decision between no deal, deal, etc. Maybe a way forward, as at the moment no-one is happy, at least this way everyone thinks they are gaining something?
Stands back and prepares for verbal assault. :)
Cracking idea, let's see the remainers moan about that
Will you still call it the 'will of the people' when the number of spoilt ballot papers outweighs the non-spoilt ones?
-
So just to confirm you do not respect the result of REF1 and would only vote in REF2 if it allows you to get your own way regardless of what was voted for earlier.
Very interesting take on democracy you have. So despite the winning side of REF1 offering you a choice in the final outcome it is still not good enough for you. You want it all your own way or no way. How do you react when Donny get beaten, do you demand a replay every time?
In life you win some and you lose some, but then you just have to get on with it.
-
It's hard work BB.
If you want controls in immigration from the EU then yes, you want an end to freedom of movement.
-
So just to confirm you do not respect the result of REF1 and would only vote in REF2 if it allows you to get your own way regardless of what was voted for earlier.
Very interesting take on democracy you have. So despite the winning side of REF1 offering you a choice in the final outcome it is still not good enough for you. You want it all your own way or no way. How do you react when Donny get beaten, do you demand a replay every time?
In life you win some and you lose some, but then you just have to get on with it.
I respect the result of any vote. Until it gets superceded. Just like every other vote we hold in this country.
Having said that, as the Tories 'won' the last General Election, would you respect the next General Election result if the only options then allowed on the ballot paper were Conservative and the DUP?
-
So just to confirm you do not respect the result of REF1 and would only vote in REF2 if it allows you to get your own way regardless of what was voted for earlier.
Very interesting take on democracy you have. So despite the winning side of REF1 offering you a choice in the final outcome it is still not good enough for you. You want it all your own way or no way. How do you react when Donny get beaten, do you demand a replay every time?
In life you win some and you lose some, but then you just have to get on with it.
I respect the result of any vote. Until it gets superceded. Just like every other vote we hold in this country.
Having said that, as the Tories 'won' the last General Election, would you respect the next General Election result if the only options then allowed on the ballot paper were Conservative and the DUP?
I thought your lot said it was a once in a lifetime vote?
-
I would say count the Votes of the 1975 Referendum first where 66% voted to Remain and only 33% voted to Leave (including me). Only those still living would count
That result has not been respected by (mainly) Conservative MPS - but even though I lost on that occassion I respected the fact that 66% to 33% was indeed a huge majority
However times change - people die - new Voters come along - in fact new Voters have come along since the 2016 Vote - and of course Tory Leavers have never respected the 1975 Result and eventually got their way and got a Second Referendum
For me - I dont give a s**t what happens now but the one thing I do despair at is people like May and Rudd and Lidington and lots of ordinary people just like me chorusing the line "we must respect the Result of the Referendum" or saying "you lost get over it" without a trace of irony about 1975 *
* I voted the wrong way then but it still rankles me because it is still just brushed aside as though it was so far back in history like the Domesday Book or Magna Carta or the Wars of the Roses that it has no validity whatsoever - when in fact it was just over 40 years since
-
So just to confirm you do not respect the result of REF1 and would only vote in REF2 if it allows you to get your own way regardless of what was voted for earlier.
Very interesting take on democracy you have. So despite the winning side of REF1 offering you a choice in the final outcome it is still not good enough for you. You want it all your own way or no way. How do you react when Donny get beaten, do you demand a replay every time?
In life you win some and you lose some, but then you just have to get on with it.
I respect the result of any vote. Until it gets superceded. Just like every other vote we hold in this country.
Having said that, as the Tories 'won' the last General Election, would you respect the next General Election result if the only options then allowed on the ballot paper were Conservative and the DUP?
I thought your lot said it was a once in a lifetime vote?
'My lot'? I never said that. Perhaps if that statement had been the subject of a referendum that it won then it might have some validity! But then, I know that any vote only lasts until it's superceded.
-
I would say count the Votes of the 1975 Referendum first where 66% voted to Remain and only 33% voted to Leave (including me). Only those still living would count
That result has not been respected by (mainly) Conservative MPS - but even though I lost on that occassion I respected the fact that 66% to 33% was indeed a huge majority
However times change - people die - new Voters come along - in fact new Voters have come along since the 2016 Vote - and of course Tory Leavers have never respected the 1975 Result and eventually got their way and got a Second Referendum
For me - I dont give a s**t what happens now but the one thing I do despair at is people like May and Rudd and Lidington and lots of ordinary people just like me chorusing the line "we must respect the Result of the Referendum" or saying "you lost get over it" without a trace of irony about 1975 *
* I voted the wrong way then but it still rankles me because it is still just brushed aside as though it was so far back in history like the Domesday Book or Magna Carta or the Wars of the Roses that it has no validity whatsoever - when in fact it was just over 40 years since
I thought that vote was a 'once in a lifetime' vote though? I remember it and I'm still alive.
-
AL
YOUR lot said repeatedly during the campaign that Brexit would mean we'd be like Norway and Switzerland. And that we'd be £350m/week better off. And that we held all the cards in negotiations. And that 80 million Turks were about to descend on the UK.
Here's a thought. Why don't we put to one side what anyone said in 2016 and start thinking like grown ups about where we are now?
-
It's hard work BB.
If you want controls in immigration from the EU then yes, you want an end to freedom of movement.
I want controls In the freedom of movement. Don't you?
-
It's hard work BB.
If you want controls in immigration from the EU then yes, you want an end to freedom of movement.
I want controls In the freedom of movement. Don't you?
In the same way women can be slightly pregnant, no doubt.
'You can have Freedom Of Movement, but only the Freedom to do what you're told.'
-
AL
YOUR lot said repeatedly during the campaign that Brexit would mean we'd be like Norway and Switzerland. And that we'd be £350m/week better off. And that we held all the cards in negotiations. And that 80 million Turks were about to descend on the UK.
Here's a thought. Why don't we put to one side what anyone said in 2016 and start thinking like grown ups about where we are now?
Look, I know I come over over the top on here, but i'm only taking the wee wee (most of the time ), but I think brushing aside a referendum held just two years ago is a bit strong, and in my opinion comes over as 'We'll keep voting until we get the right result'. It's all a bit banana republic.
The result of REF1 must be upheld or millions such as myself would not bother taking part in the democratic process any longer. Is that really what we want? In all votes there are winners and losers, I believe the idea on REF2 being about how we leave would help bring together both sides of the argument and help heal the rift in the country. There you have it, AL the voice of reconciliation. Both sides give something, both sides get something. You can't say fairer than that. Next problem please? I ought to be in government except i'm not bent enough.
-
Do you mean as opposed to heavily pregnant?
-
AL
YOUR lot said repeatedly during the campaign that Brexit would mean we'd be like Norway and Switzerland. And that we'd be £350m/week better off. And that we held all the cards in negotiations. And that 80 million Turks were about to descend on the UK.
Here's a thought. Why don't we put to one side what anyone said in 2016 and start thinking like grown ups about where we are now?
Look, I know I come over over the top on here, but i'm only taking the wee wee (most of the time ), but I think brushing aside a referendum held just two years ago is a bit strong, and in my opinion comes over as 'We'll keep voting until we get the right result'. It's all a bit banana republic.
The result of REF1 must be upheld or millions such as myself would not bother taking part in the democratic process any longer. Is that really what we want? In all votes there are winners and losers, I believe the idea on REF2 being about how we leave would help bring together both sides of the argument and help heal the rift in the country. There you have it, AL the voice of reconciliation. Both sides give something, both sides get something. You can't say fairer than that. Next problem please? I ought to be in government except i'm not bent enough.
If a Parliament composed of MPs elected in 2017 - AFTER the referendum - vote down Brexit, shouldn't the 2017 General Election result be 'respected' more than a vote that took place before it?
-
Do you mean as opposed to heavily pregnant?
You tell me, you're the one that thinks mutually exclusive things can co-exist.
-
BB
Then you want the EU to remove one of the key pillars of the Single Market, right?
-
AL
YOUR lot said repeatedly during the campaign that Brexit would mean we'd be like Norway and Switzerland. And that we'd be £350m/week better off. And that we held all the cards in negotiations. And that 80 million Turks were about to descend on the UK.
Here's a thought. Why don't we put to one side what anyone said in 2016 and start thinking like grown ups about where we are now?
Look, I know I come over over the top on here, but i'm only taking the wee wee (most of the time ), but I think brushing aside a referendum held just two years ago is a bit strong, and in my opinion comes over as 'We'll keep voting until we get the right result'. It's all a bit banana republic.
The result of REF1 must be upheld or millions such as myself would not bother taking part in the democratic process any longer. Is that really what we want? In all votes there are winners and losers, I believe the idea on REF2 being about how we leave would help bring together both sides of the argument and help heal the rift in the country. There you have it, AL the voice of reconciliation. Both sides give something, both sides get something. You can't say fairer than that. Next problem please? I ought to be in government except i'm not bent enough.
If a Parliament composed of MPs elected in 2017 - AFTER the referendum - vote down Brexit, shouldn't the 2017 General Election result be 'respected' more than a vote that took place before it?
But that's two different votes on two different things.
You may have had labour voters who voted leave in the referendum but also voted for JC in the election because of his social policies etc. I can't see how you can connect the two votes.
-
BB
Then you want the EU to remove one of the key pillars of the Single Market, right?
I think the lack of control of immigration was the main reason why the majority voted to leave.
Don't you want any sort of control on immigration?
-
I'm sure it was BB. There were people on here saying they were voting Leave because of Kosovans and Somalians and Pakistanis.
What I want is irrelevant here. We're addressing the issue of what you think the EU should have ceded to us.
The other countries in the EU don't away with FoM because, on balance, they prefer to have it. If we wanted the EU to change that, maybe we could have been having a grown up discussion with them over the past many years, instead of shouting the odds at them and blaming the EU for our ills.
If we don't want the benefits that coming with FoM (and there are many) we can drop out if it of course. And lose the benefits of the Single Market.
-
BB
Then you want the EU to remove one of the key pillars of the Single Market, right?
I think the lack of control of immigration was the main reason why the majority voted to leave.
Don't you want any sort of control on immigration?
Just a guess but if brexit happens and britain continues on the downward growth spiral the brexshitters will be wishing they had freedom of movement to go and work in the rich countries of the EU.
-
I've a much more serious concern.
I entirely appreciate the frustrations that led to the Brexit vote. I was predicting that nearly a decade ago. It's a story as old as the hills that, when people hit economic hard times, they blame immigrants. It's happened throughout history and around the world and it was inevitable that it would happen here as a direct result of Austerity.
Go and look at the polls of UKIP support over the past 20 years. They barely registered before 2010, then they grew rapidly. As a direct consequence of the entirely justifiable anger that people felt about working harder and getting poorer.
Farage is no different to hundreds of populist rabble rousers throughout history. He sensed people's frustrations and told them it was the fault of the immigrants and the immigrants were the fault of the EU.
But here's my deep worry.
When we leave the EU and Take Back Control, and when living standards then get markedly worse (as they will, to an extent that no Brexit supporter seems prepared to countenance) where does the anger get directed then?
-
By the way, that gets to the heart of the other issue that Brexiters never want to think about: why Putin poured money into the Leave campaign.
Putin's entire foreign policy is based on weakening and dividing Europe, to give him the opportunity to threaten and bully small countries a way that he can't do to the much bigger and stronger EU.
Weakening and dividing Britain is a perfect step for him. It entirely explains why he was such a backer of Brexit.
You lot supporting Leave are effectively colluding with the wishes of an enemy foreign state.
-
AL
YOUR lot said repeatedly during the campaign that Brexit would mean we'd be like Norway and Switzerland. And that we'd be £350m/week better off. And that we held all the cards in negotiations. And that 80 million Turks were about to descend on the UK.
Here's a thought. Why don't we put to one side what anyone said in 2016 and start thinking like grown ups about where we are now?
Speaking of voters who have changed their mind, I have friends who originally voted to leave who now say that in a second referendum, they would change their vote to remain.
I haven’t spoken to any remainers who have said they would change their vote to leave.
Look, I know I come over over the top on here, but i'm only taking the wee wee (most of the time ), but I think brushing aside a referendum held just two years ago is a bit strong, and in my opinion comes over as 'We'll keep voting until we get the right result'. It's all a bit banana republic.
The result of REF1 must be upheld or millions such as myself would not bother taking part in the democratic process any longer. Is that really what we want? In all votes there are winners and losers, I believe the idea on REF2 being about how we leave would help bring together both sides of the argument and help heal the rift in the country. There you have it, AL the voice of reconciliation. Both sides give something, both sides get something. You can't say fairer than that. Next problem please? I ought to be in government except i'm not bent enough.
-
Heard this on radio 4 this morning, unfortunately did not catch the name of the chap speaking but he suggested a way forward which would maybe be acceptable to all and break through the current stalemate
He suggested a second referendum, but only a referendum on how we leave.
The first referendum result stands and we still leave, however the second one is a decision between no deal, deal, etc. Maybe a way forward, as at the moment no-one is happy, at least this way everyone thinks they are gaining something?
Stands back and prepares for verbal assault. :)
What you suggest there should have been put forward in the 2016 referendum, ie leave on the agreed terms, or remain..
That’s been my point all along..
-
AL
Problem with that, as I've said all along, is that it doesn't address the fundamentally undemocratic aspect of the 2016 vote.
There is an implicit assumption that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 assuming that there would be a deal with the EU would prefer No Deal to Remain. And an assumption that everyone who voted Leave wanting a No Deal break would prefer to leave with a deal than to remain.
In other words, it assumes that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 was voting for ANY type of Brexit.
There is no evidence that these assumptions are correct. In fact, both Farage and Johnson have said that we'd be better off staying IN than leaving on the terms of May's deal, so there's two Leave voters straightaway who disprove that idea.
So the ONLY way you could have a properly democratic vote would be the way that I've said on here.
Three choices.
No Deal
May Deal
Remain
You put a 1 in the box at the side of your first preference and a 2 for your second preference.
All the 1s get added up. If one alternative has 50%, that wins. If not, the alternative in third place is eliminated and all the 2s that were on those papers are reallocated, giving one of the 2 remaining options a 50+% share.
It baffles me how anyone could have anything against that approach.
-
BST,
I don't understand your 3 choices.
No deal.....now not on the table because of the Grieve amendment.
May deal....dead on tuesday after the vote, no HoC support.
The real choice is:
Remain
Norway plus
Canada style...maybe!
No real point in another referendum with the current HoC make up.
Any option needs to have the numbers in the HoC on a cross party basis.
This is why Rudd has flagged up the alternative today, to prepare for the next step after tuesday.
Key point is that Brexit as advertised is not going to happen under the current HoC.
That means the Leavers are going to be left in a rage.
That is why a GE is needed, rather than a referendum re-run which could once again give a Leave outcome. The Tories will not go into a GE with the Maybot in charge, so the plotters will need to remove her at an early date.
-
Albie.
The Grieve amendment does effectively scupper No Deal in the current situation.
But I can't see how Parliament would be practically able to not implement a No Deal Brexit if No Deal was a clear and unambiguous alternative in a non-binary referendum and won that referendum.
It would be lunacy for us to go that route of course, but if that was the outcome, everyone would need to accept it.
Norway and Canada deals are all well and good, but they don't currently exist. So you'd be back into the situation of asking someone to vote for something that would be sorted out in the future.
That's precisely how we got into this clusterf**k in the first place.
There are only 3 clear and unambiguous options on the table.
Remain
No Deal
May deal.
The time has run out for any other sort of deal to be agreed in detail with the EU, then put to a referendum, let alone TWO deals as you are suggesting. That's even assuming that the EU would be prepared to rip up the deal they've been working on for two years and start again. If I were in their shoes, I'd tell us to b*llocks if we came along now saying "Err, sorry. We've changed our minds. Can we start all over again please?"
-
BST,
Sorry, but I think you are as wrong as a wrong thing on this one!
Unless I have misread, you are saying there should be a new referendum to consider options long since dead and buried.
The earliest that any new referendum could be called is going to be well into next year.
By then, the May deal will be a long forgotten footnote to the debate.
No deal will still exist in theory, but cannot get past the UK parliamentary arithmetic.
The EU legal opinion that the UK could retract from the March departure is there to give wriggle room.
In other words, if we decide on another tack once Treeza's non-runner is euthanised, then accomodation will be made.
You are making the mistake of assuming that the options are fixed. This is the May propaganda line she has been peddling like snake oil around the country.
I start from the perspective that all positions are provisional, and subject to revision.
I can guarentee that Norway Plus will be the next staging post after the vote on tuesday.
As I have said before, I am commenting on what I think will happen, not what I think should happen!
-
Albie
I take your point but I disagree with it. YOU are taking the current scenario as fixed.
Parliament may well not pass the May deal or No Deal NOW, but it would not dare to ignore a referendum where the result was explicitly and unambiguously for one of those.
I do agree that there's a head of steam building up for Norway+ but I don't see how that could possibly win a referendum. It is a sensible compromise, but it will satisfy neither Hard Brexiters nor Remainers.
The only way Norway+ gets implemented is via Parliament and there'll be he'll to pay afterwards. The whole Europe running sore will just go on and on and on.
More importantly in the current Parliamentary situation, Norway+ will split the Tory party apart, so no-one is going to champion it from their side, despite Amber Rudd flying a kite this morning.
Then there's Labour. Corbyn has spent the past two and a half years insisting we'll leave the SM. Is he going to whip his party to support Norway+?
Then there's the time issue. Presumably negotiations on the Norway Plus withdrawal agreement will take a long time to conclude and ratify? So we remain in limbo?
-
BST,
Sorry, but I think you are as wrong as a wrong thing on this one!
Unless I have misread, you are saying there should be a new referendum to consider options long since dead and buried.
The earliest that any new referendum could be called is going to be well into next year.
By then, the May deal will be a long forgotten footnote to the debate.
No deal will still exist in theory, but cannot get past the UK parliamentary arithmetic.
The EU legal opinion that the UK could retract from the March departure is there to give wriggle room.
In other words, if we decide on another tack once Treeza's non-runner is euthanised, then accomodation will be made.
You are making the mistake of assuming that the options are fixed. This is the May propaganda line she has been peddling like snake oil around the country.
I start from the perspective that all positions are provisional, and subject to revision.
I can guarentee that Norway Plus will be the next staging post after the vote on tuesday.
As I have said before, I am commenting on what I think will happen, not what I think should happen!
The reason BST said those options is because they are the only ones that don't need any renegotiations with the EU and are therefore more alive than any other options. The point to any new referendum would be to unblock Parliament by making it absolutely plain what option of the three options on offer the electorate wants. It could even be made binding on parliament - unlike the first referendum - so that Parliament would not only be bound to pass the winning option, they wouldn't be able to make any amendments to it or be able to try any other blocking tactics.
-
Glyn,
The EU are prepared to renegotiate. Prodi has been flagging that up today.
They are working to the assumption May will crash and burn on tuesday.
As far as I am aware, a referendum cannot be made binding, as the HoC remains the decision maker.
If you know different, can you give a ref?
BST,
The point about I was trying to make is about timing, and what the available options (and the numbers) might be at the point of any new referendum.
Your questions will not be appropriate in 2019, when the game has moved on.
The situation is close to insoluble, hence the call for a new GE. The current impasse cannot be unblocked with the present PM and the existing balance of interests in the HoC.
A new referendum would surely need to canvass opinion about the options which will emerge, rather than those already deceased.
Anyway, lets agree to differ.
I am confident that by the recess we will all be in a different place!
EDIT;
Here is the Prodi intervention:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-brexit-deal-talks-renegotiate-theresa-may-vote-european-commission-president-romando-prodi-a8673901.html
No accident it is from the former President......for the same reason it is Rudd, not May, fronting the new "Plan B".
-
I'm sure it was BB. There were people on here saying they were voting Leave because of Kosovans and Somalians and Pakistanis.
What I want is irrelevant here. We're addressing the issue of what you think the EU should have ceded to us.
The other countries in the EU don't away with FoM because, on balance, they prefer to have it. If we wanted the EU to change that, maybe we could have been having a grown up discussion with them over the past many years, instead of shouting the odds at them and blaming the EU for our ills.
If we don't want the benefits that coming with FoM (and there are many) we can drop out if it of course. And lose the benefits of the Single Market.
So, it doesn't matter what you think but it does matter what I think!
The reality is, like I've told you before, it doesn't matter what I think personally, but my opinion why we voted to leave does. That's what is important.
Now, stop avoiding the question and explain your opinion why the majority wanted to leave.
-
The majority who voted wanted to leave, just, it was quite close wasn’t it.?
Wonder what those who didn’t vote wanted, but couldn’t be bothered to vote.?
-
BB
Calm down a bit. The discussion was about what changes to EU policy YOU had wanted. That's why my opinion wasn't important.
It seems that you're frustrated that the EU didn't accommodate us by changing a policy that the rest of the EU doesn't really want to change. I'm sure you appreciate the difficulty there.
For what it's worth, I DO of course think that immigration was a major factor, in forming people's opinions, albeit that I think that is a lot more to the issue than simply disliking immigrants as I said up the page at 12:52.
-
No BST. The discussion was about what I think would have been a good move from the EU to stop Brexit. The major reason why the vote went to leave was because of the lack of control of immigration. Whether I sympathise with that point is irrelevant.
-
BB
It's really tiring when you start doing the semantics thing. It always leaves me feeling like you prefer arguing for arguing's sake than in order to think around an issue. Personally, I usually find being as clear as possible about what you mean is the best way to have a discussion, but there you go.
And by the way, the man who ran the official Leave campaign disagrees with you. He says it was the £350m claim that won the vote for Leave.
-
Good for him, I think he's wrong. Just like I think you're wrong.
-
Yeah of course. He only had Cambridge Analytica studying people's social media messages and a shit load of private polling done by which to assess the things that changed voters' opinions, so I'm sure you're right.
Which bit of my opinion do you think is wrong and why?
-
I think you're wrong everytime you disagree with me, otherwise I wouldn't disagree with you.
-
Thank f**k we won today or you'd be REALLY cantankerous.
-
f**k me! There's me stuck here on holiday having to break off to read the latest personal attack on what went wrong in the vote and why my opinion played such a big part in it and I'M now being cantankerous!
You just couldn't make it up!
-
For what its worth from me. A Delay on exiting, followed by a G election and renegotiation is most likely. or by some miracle A rudd gets a stab at tweaking the deal under the current deadline.
Last resort ! Back to the people but no remain on the table!!
If it were even me and mine as remainers would struggle with the fact that this question is being voted on again! It may be wrong (in our eyes) and part of me desperately wants this, what looks like a window of opportunity to reverse the decision. But.
The split in the country would be worse and longer than that of the split from our euro friends??
-
Auckley
I keep hearing how another referendum that has Remain as the outcome would split the country. In fact, people are now saying it will lead to far-right violence.
Just sit back and reflect on what you are saying.
A vote that showed that the majority of people in the country wanted Remain shouldn't happen because of the effect it would have on the minority.
-
Surely if to leave is still the will of the people then the Brexiteers have nothing to fear by giving them the final say.
-
Ah but as this geek* on Andrew Marr has said 10 times so far - oops make that 11 - THAT does not deliver on the will of the British People (*Steven Berkely)
Again they mention 2016 but NEVER refer to 1975 (and the will of the People at that point - who voted by a 33% Majority to "Remain" ) Count the Votes of the living from then and add them to 2016 and I will listed
Also I voted Leave in 1975 and would wish to alter my Vote
-
Auckley
I keep hearing how another referendum that has Remain as the outcome would split the country. In fact, people are now saying it will lead to far-right violence.
Just sit back and reflect on what you are saying.
A vote that showed that the majority of people in the country wanted Remain shouldn't happen because of the effect it would have on the minority.
True billy, a minority im sure but a minority with the moral high ground? Also doesn't put together the still fractured Tory party! Who like them or not spend at least half the time in power. This will rumble on for another half a century.
I find myself agreeing with you but also myself?!?!? Im either mad or this is an impossible situation for our little island that's never been fully into the euro project!
-
FoM, all these people taking jobs and annoying locals, something has to be done.
Brits abroad: how many people from the UK live in other EU countries?
1.3 million people born in the UK live in other EU countries, according to 2017 estimates from the United Nations (UN). Around 900,000 UK citizens were long-term residents in other EU countries in 2010 and 2011, according to census data across the EU collated by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
-
FoM, all these people taking jobs and annoying locals, something has to be done.
Brits abroad: how many people from the UK live in other EU countries?
1.3 million people born in the UK live in other EU countries, according to 2017 estimates from the United Nations (UN). Around 900,000 UK citizens were long-term residents in other EU countries in 2010 and 2011, according to census data across the EU collated by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
But they aren't immigrants, they're "ex pats"!
-
FoM, all these people taking jobs and annoying locals, something has to be done.
Brits abroad: how many people from the UK live in other EU countries?
1.3 million people born in the UK live in other EU countries, according to 2017 estimates from the United Nations (UN). Around 900,000 UK citizens were long-term residents in other EU countries in 2010 and 2011, according to census data across the EU collated by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
And your point is?
But they aren't immigrants, they're "ex pats"!
-
This reminds me of the episode of Auf Wiedersehen Pet, where the hut residents voted to redecorate their spartan accommodation..
Try all had a vote and chose their preferred colour and a second choice.. they ended up with yellow, which was no one’s preference but was the largest economy choice.. so no one was happy..
And that’s in a sitcom from about 35 years ago, how the hell can’t we do it right asa country now.??
-
Worth a read.
https://m.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2228185460839520/
If anyone in Govt is seriously suggesting to May that she go to Brussels and threaten them with a No Deal walkout, that shows how far detached from reality they are, and how they are putting the priority of limping May's career on for another few weeks above the good of the nation.
Last 3 paragraphs though sum up the f**king shambles of this past 2.5 years.
-
Anyone with an ounce of honour would have resigned a long time agao
-
FoM, all these people taking jobs and annoying locals, something has to be done.
Brits abroad: how many people from the UK live in other EU countries?
1.3 million people born in the UK live in other EU countries, according to 2017 estimates from the United Nations (UN). Around 900,000 UK citizens were long-term residents in other EU countries in 2010 and 2011, according to census data across the EU collated by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
But they aren't immigrants, they're "ex pats"!
Those UK citizens living abroad were spread over Europe, mainly France, Spain and Germany. The UK had THREE TIMES that number of European foreigners solely living here!
-
BB
Stop and have a think about what you just said. There's a really, really important sub-conscious tell in there.
-
Go on then Billy. Tell me what a really racist bas**rd I am. I'm sure some of your fans will agree with you.
-
Go on then Billy. Tell me what a really racist bas**rd I am. I'm sure some of your fans will agree with you.
I don’t believe you’re racist, in fact I agree with your opinion that a large percentage voted leave because of immigration (including me) without even thinking about any other effects of brexit
-
Not at all what I meant BB. Not at all. Why on earth would I call you racist when I don't think you are?
But the whole of our national discussion about Europe is shot through with this this Us and Them thing about our attitude to the rest of the EU. Like it's UK vs this monolith that is the EU. Not us trying to rub along with 27 other independent countries.
So, you compared the total number of British ex-pats living throughout the whole of the EU with the number of ex-pats of the other 27 EU states SOLELY (your word) living here.
Do you see?
I do also think that language is vitally important in discussions like this. And I note that you described British ex-pats as "citizens" while EU ex-pats were "foreigners". I'm not calling that "racist" but it does to some extent reflect the standarx of the debate in the UK. It's subtle and sub-conscious and I'm sure not deliberate. But it's something we should all be aware of.
At base, all the people we are talking about are people.
-
BST. Do you seriously think we are any different to any other EU Country regarding an 'us and them' attitude?
I used the term UK citizens because that's what they are. They might be UK foreigners to other countries but they are UK citizens to me living abroad! Just like other countries have their citizens living abroad and EU foreigners living in their country!
Is that me being unknowingly racist then?
I gave the figures regarding the massive difference in EU foreigners living here compared to UK citizens living abroad to put some perspective on a previous post that suggested it was somewhat of a tit for tat exchange in numbers.
-
PS. When i say 'tit for tat' I'm not referring to foreigners as 'tits' and us as 'tats'. Nor the other way round.
-
No BB. I don't think it's you being unknowingly racist. I thought I'd made that clear. I think it IS a subject where we need to think very carefully about how we approach it.
I guess I would though. My mother's family were economic immigrants from Ireland who came over to dig coal. My wife's father was an immigrant from Italy who came over in search of work.
So it's an issue that is close to home for me.
I entirely accept your comment on the relative numbers of ex-pats living on either side and I probably was too sensitive on that one. That's a feature of the fact that our economy is significantly stronger than the EU average. That's part of the deal and it's one that I, for one, am prepared to accept because the overall impact of our membership of the EU is net positive. And I work in a sector that has a far higher than average number of non-UK born EU employees. They make us a stronger, richer and more resilient economy.
-
So just to confirm you do not respect the result of REF1 and would only vote in REF2 if it allows you to get your own way regardless of what was voted for earlier.
Very interesting take on democracy you have. So despite the winning side of REF1 offering you a choice in the final outcome it is still not good enough for you. You want it all your own way or no way. How do you react when Donny get beaten, do you demand a replay every time?
In life you win some and you lose some, but then you just have to get on with it.
Well if you're comparing it to football it's 2006, you're a Juventus fan and your teams just won the league.
... But wait a minute, it turns out your campaign wasn't as honest as it first looked.
-
And no, I don't think we are different to other EU countries. That's kind of the point.
Issue is though, the other countries don't seem to build this up to the extent that we do.
-
"It is a subject where we need to think very carefully about how we approach it".
BST. That's my point. Assuming the obvious and by "it" you are referring to the subject of racism, there has to be a reason why we have to be more careful of what we say these days. So much so that even the slightest twist or misinterpretation can get us in trouble. What is more sickening is the use of the race card in a totally mischievous way to the point of deformation of character in order to win political points.
Remainers have done that to death.
-
No BB. I'm not talking about racism. I'm talking about how we discuss immigration.
I don't by any stretch of the imagination think that everyone who has concerns about immigration is racist. I do think that the level of discussion in this country is generally neither pleasant not well-informed.
-
Looks like VOTE PULLED - even after days of denying it !
-
This is just taking the piss now.
-
If she's pulled the deal, the clock is ticking on her career.
If she's pulled the deal, it's because she was going to lose the vote by an amount that meant she couldn't possibly go on as PM.
If she'd lost the vote by 30-40, perversely that would have strengthened her. She'd have been able to go to Brussels and say, "just give me SOMETHING" and I'll be able to convince enough rebels to get this deal over the line.
Pulling the vote means she was expecting to lose spectacularly. Like 100+ votes. That NEVER happens to a PM on any vote, nevermind one as crucial as this.
But there's nothing the EU can cede that can possibly pull round that many rebels AND be acceptable to the other 27 EU Govts.
We're finally at the point that everyone knew we were going to get to. The situation where what the Tory party wants doesn't fit with what Europe can give. And the time has run out.
May's just playing out the last few days of her time and hoping something miraculous happens. If it does, she's gone.
-
Oh yeah. And note.
There's nothing about what is good for the country in all this. The whole shitshow has been about sorting out the psychosis in the Tory party, and trying to eke out May's career.
An utter, unmitigated f**king shambles. They should never be allowed near power for a generation after what they have done to the country.
-
If I was the EU I'd tell her to feck off and stop wasting our time.
-
According to the European court this morning, the uk can revoke article 50 without needing approval from the rest of the EU..
-
Should've known this was coming after they started denying it tbh.
-
And so the goat f**k keeps on rolling.. bbc reporting the £ down about half a percent to 2018 lows against € and $, due to today’s uncertainty..
-
If this was a movie, the critics would be saying it was far from reality
-
Nicked this from twitter
May-day May-day, abort abort #BrexitVote
-
Looking like a hard brexit is more likely by the day
-
Fortunately not BS. There are still grown ups in charge who will protect you from that stupidity.
-
Looking like a hard brexit is more likely by the day
There will be a second referendum before that happens and we all know what will happen then.
-
Simply will not be a second referendum.....
-
Simply will not be a second referendum.....
You can get 8/11 no referendum at the bookies, fill your boots.
-
Simply will not be a second referendum.....
How can you possibly say that with any certainty.??
The whole Brexit is a complete clusterf**k whether you want to leave or stay, the government has made a shambles of it all so any outcome is still possible..
-
Simply will not be a second referendum.....
How can you possibly say that with any certainty.??
The whole Brexit is a complete clusterf**k whether you want to leave or stay, the government has made a shambles of it all so any outcome is still possible..
The shit show so far would pale into insignificance if there was a second referendum.
-
With what the government may eventually propose and vote on for brexit being probably so fa away from what leave voters wanted, taking the final decision back to the electorate may be the only sensible action..
Alternatively - article 50 is delayed, there’s a general election, and the new government pulls out of brexit notwithstanding the 2016 referendum..
-
There's not going to be a General Election. Get that clear. Neither the Tory party or the DUP (once May has gone) want one. They have a majority in the Commons. So there won't be one.
We WILL have a Tory Govt with DUP support sorting out the clusterf**k that THEY got us into.
May will go.
Someone else will take over but get this clear in your heads.
Parliament will not allow a No Deal Brexit to occur.
Get that clear and the consequence is obvious. There is now no possible way that this Parliament can support ANY deal.
Neither a softer deal which Lab would propose, or a harder deal which the Johnson wing if the Tory party would propose can get a majority.
There is no possible outcome to get us out of the impasse apart from a referendum on CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS questions about what Leave means.
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
-
There's not going to be a General Election. Get that clear. Neither the Tory party or the DUP (once May has gone) want one. They have a majority in the Commons. So there won't be one.
We WILL have a Tory Govt with DUP support sorting out the clusterf**k that THEY got us into.
May will go.
Someone else will take over but get this clear in your heads.
Parliament will not allow a No Deal Brexit to occur.
Get that clear and the consequence is obvious. There is now no possible way that this Parliament can support ANY deal.
Neither a softer deal which Lab would propose, or a harder deal which the Johnson wing if the Tory party would propose can get a majority.
There is no possible outcome to get us out of the impasse apart from a referendum on CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS questions about what Leave means.
I agree with most of this, especially the last bit, which is what the original referendum should have been about.!
Although I wouldn’t rule out a general election, especially if enough Brexiteer MPs force a no confidence vote in the government, never mind in the PM..
Realistically I think we will postpone article 50, May will go - either voluntarily or by forced ejection - and then we’ll be in a pissing contest with the EU for a new deal, which at the moment the EU won’t do..
-
IDM
The thing about bringing down the Govt and forcing a GE is, you have to ask yourself "who benefits?"
Why should the Hard Brexit believers bring down a Tory Govt and run the risk of installing a Labour one?
The ONLY way a GE can be called is if a dozen or so Tory and/or DUP MPs decided that it is in their interests to bring this Govt to an end, and I can't for the life of me see what they would stand to gain by that.
Except.
Just possibly.
There might be one possibility I'm overlooking, but it is VERY outlandish and would require someone to be dowing so VERY long term planning.
If enough Tories decided that Brexit was now so toxic that the best way out for them would be to stand aside and let a Labour Govt come in, take the responsibility for sorting it out and get all the shit of the Hard Brexit voters aimed at them when they went through with the very softest of Brexits.
But that would go against every instinct of politicians, which is to hang on for as long as you can and not give power to the other side.
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
-
I don’t think there will be another GE for the reasons you outlined, but given the collossal turd wagon this government is pulling now, I can’t rule anything out..
-
Actually, the enormity of May pulling this vote and scuttling off back to Brussels is only just dawning on me.
Our system of Govt is supposed to be about Parliament being sovereign, but the PM having some quite exceptional powers as, effectively the Chief Executive Officer. In theory, the PM can only operate with the consent of Parliament, but in practice, for most of my lifetime, PMs have had very large majorities in the Commons. Thatcher never had less that 40. Blair and Brown never had less than 60. Most of the time they had majorities above 100. Even Cameron in 2010-15, once he'd got the LDs acting as safe poodles had a majority of more than 70 seats.
In those circumstances, unless they f**k up monumentally, the PM is all-powerful. They can cope with a couple of dozen rebels on their side voting against them and they don't have to placate them. So, Parliament tends to become very lacking in power and the PM does as the PM says.
May's situation has shown that we are now in a totally different scenario. I have never in all my life seen Parliament effectively say to a PM "NO! We are not accepting what you say" on such an important issue. I've never seen a PM running scared of Parliament and go scuttling off to other countries begging for help to save his/her career.
But that's where we are today. A PM in office but not in power.
-
There's not going to be a General Election. Get that clear. Neither the Tory party or the DUP (once May has gone) want one. They have a majority in the Commons. So there won't be one.
We WILL have a Tory Govt with DUP support sorting out the clusterf**k that THEY got us into.
May will go.
Someone else will take over but get this clear in your heads.
Parliament will not allow a No Deal Brexit to occur.
Get that clear and the consequence is obvious. There is now no possible way that this Parliament can support ANY deal.
Neither a softer deal which Lab would propose, or a harder deal which the Johnson wing if the Tory party would propose can get a majority.
There is no possible outcome to get us out of the impasse apart from a referendum on CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS questions about what Leave means.
BST. In this context the decision of the ECJ that the Article 50 notice can be suspended / revoked is massively important. In effect it takes "No Deal Brexit by default" off the table. Even if there are not enough MPs on any side to agree to one of the many options, there are surely enough who would vote in favour of suspending the A50 notice to avoid "crashing out" on 29th March.
It also could be used to buy time for a second referendum, maybe on May's deal or Remain, or leave with no deal or Remain, to take place next summer.
-
Actually, the enormity of May pulling this vote and scuttling off back to Brussels is only just dawning on me.
Our system of Govt is supposed to be about Parliament being sovereign, but the PM having some quite exceptional powers as, effectively the Chief Executive Officer. In theory, the PM can only operate with the consent of Parliament, but in practice, for most of my lifetime, PMs have had very large majorities in the Commons. Thatcher never had less that 40. Blair and Brown never had less than 60. Most of the time they had majorities above 100. Even Cameron in 2010-15, once he'd got the LDs acting as safe poodles had a majority of more than 70 seats.
In those circumstances, unless they f**k up monumentally, the PM is all-powerful. They can cope with a couple of dozen rebels on their side voting against them and they don't have to placate them. So, Parliament tends to become very lacking in power and the PM does as the PM says.
May's situation has shown that we are now in a totally different scenario. I have never in all my life seen Parliament effectively say to a PM "NO! We are not accepting what you say" on such an important issue. I've never seen a PM running scared of Parliament and go scuttling off to other countries begging for help to save his/her career.
But that's where we are today. A PM in office but not in power.
The only recent parallel is perhaps John Major and his battles over Maastricht. However unlike May he had a wafer-thin majority, battle lines were not so sharply drawn in the Tory party over Europe and he was able to deploy some old-fashioned arm-twisting. The Chief Whip has obviously told May today that the latter is no longer possible. Also hardly any Labour MPs have been prepared to ride over the hill to help May out.
My guess is she'll go to Brussels on Thursday and ask for some different wording on the Backstop. The EU might a while back have been prepared to give ground, but I think they will see her as a lame duck who can't deliver the agreement she negotiated with them. She's exhausted her political capital in Brussels and I expect her to be gone by the weekend.
-
BS.
Arrggghh! This is like Groundhog Day. We've been talking about this for months and months.
Renegotiate about WHAT?
The EU has red lines. It is not going to change them because it is more important for the EU to retain its integrity and stability than to help the UK out of its self-imposed disaster.
Let's go through it step by step. Again.
1) This is ALL about the Irish border, as I've been saying for two years and more.
2) The EU's policy from the start has been that if WE in the UK want a helpful deal with the EU, we have to commit to not f**king up the Irish border and causing severe problems for an EU member state (Ireland).
3) If we DON'T want a deal with the EU, we can leave without a deal, and then the Irish border issue goes away. We can shit on Ireland, but we might well expect there will be consequences down the line.
4) The EU is NOT going to change its policy on the Irish border. That much is crystal clear. we have no big negotiating cards to play to force them to do that, other than threaten to commit economic suicide ourselves. And we won't do that because it would be f**king stupid. So us threatening to do it is tedious and not believable.
5) As a result, the only situation that the EU will accept as a precursor for negotiating a preferential deal with us, is for NI to stay in the Customs Union. That, more or less, takes the border issue away. But because they don't trust us to keep our word (understandably, given how duplicitous we've been to date) they insist on that being written legally into our Withdrawal Agreement (that's the Backstop). And we, legally, are not allowed to breach that Backstop unless and until there is some other fairy dust solution to the NI border issue.
6) But the DUP (on whom this Govt depends for votes) will not accept a situation where NI has a different deal than the rest of the UK.
7) So, May has negotiated a backstop that effectively means ALL the UK will remain in the CU until the fairy dust solution to the NI border is sorted. And we cannot, legally, pull out of that.
8) But her own Hard Brexit Tory MPs won't accept that, because it infringes on UK Sovereignty.
So. Go on. Tell me what we go and renegotiate to get out of this shithole.
We haven't got anything to force the EU to change its stance.
The PM hasn't got anything to force the DUP or her Hard Brexit rebels to change their stance.
There. Is. Nothing. To. Renegotiate. What she will do is come back with some warms words from the EU and try to use that to persuade the rebels. But there are dozens and dozens and dozens of them. And they have made it clear that they are not budging on a matter of principle.
A GE could change the situation if it gave a different balance of power in the Commons. But why should the Tory party give up power?
So. I'll ask again. What possible way out is there except a clear and unambiguous referendum? That's not me saying I want that. It's me saying I cannot see any possible alternative to get us out of the massive hole that we've jumped into.
-
TRB
Nail. Head. Both of your posts.
-
The more I think about it the more I think that May knows in her heart of hearts that it's game over for her. She'll be able to say that she stuck to what she thought was right and was caught between a rock and a hard place. Avoiding the vote is surely about avoiding a General Election (although I didn't think that was on the cards even if the Government lost tomorrow.)
-
TRB
I think it was more about pride. No retired PM wants the very last thing they did to be losing a vote by 150 on the most important issue facing the country for three generations. That guarantees bottom place in the table of British PMs. As it is, she has a case that she did her best with a shite hand, and can walk away with her head held high, repeating "Strong and stable! Strong and stable!" into the sunset.
-
It's worth reflecting on what Putin must be thinking.
Make no mistake. This is an unprecedented political crisis. Govt has simply ground to a halt. John Healy is scarcely a Shadow Cabinet heavyweight, but he's just summed it up in questions in the House. It's a session on question for the Housing Secretary. Healy started off his questions by asking if there was any point asking questions as no-one in Cabinet seems to be being told from one minute to the next what Govt policy is.
Think about this. This is utterly unprecedented. We are one of the strongest, richest, most dynamic, most powerful countries in the world, with one of the best established and most stable forms of Government. And it is falling apart in front of our eyes. This simply doesn't happen. Ever. And it will take years for us to regain our stability and our image in the eyes of other countries.
Not a bad return for Putin, on the £8m he shoved into the pockets of Farage and Banks to tip the vote in 2016. He must be pissing himself.
-
Aye but at least we took back control! :silly:
-
Here's the core of the problem. It's actually very simple and easy to follow.
May wants a deal with the EU, with the UK out of the CU. But the EU won't gives us that deal because of the effect on Ireland.
If May wants to keep the DUP on side AND get a deal with the EU, that means all of the UK staying in the EU. But dozens of her own MPs won't vote for that so she can't get that past the Commons and she'll be booted out if she tries.
If May wants to keep all her MPs on side AND get a deal with the EU, it means NI and GB having different arrangements. But the DUP won't vote for that, so May's Govt loses a vote on No Confidence and there is a GE.
If we don't want a deal with the EU, we can walk away and say b*llocks to the Irish border. But that means economic Armageddon, and there is no way she can get that past the Commons.
It's a perfectly intractable problem. There is no way out whatsoever without a GE (which won't happen) or a referendum which MPs can then fall back on as instruction from the public.
-
It my be that the HOC can FORCE a Vote on whether the Vote tonight can be suspended
The Speaker has just said "it would be most discourteous" for the Debate to be halted now
So I hope we get a Vote that is overwhelmingly in favour of them having the "suspended" Vote and that one slaughters May for good
-
Will the 'brexit means brexit' people ignore the fact the prime minister has just cancelled a democratic vote in parliament because she knew she was going to lose?
Whichever way you turn, on all sides, hypocrisy is staring you in the face. Sooner or later you have to become a grown-up about democracy lark and start making real meaningful statements about the pragmatic situation we're in.
-
I assume the 1922 Committee will now get the 48 votes required to trigger a leadership vote.
Do the Tories support May to prevent Gove/Johnson/Rees-Smug gaining control, or is there another option to hold the rabid right at arms length?
After she falls (or is pushed) a new leader does not change the numbers game. It just puts someone else in the intractable position of leading a government without power.
They can choose to plough on, but to what end?
The key point is that a government needs a working majority, and that can only be delivered by a GE.
But there is a further problem that the fixed term parliament act can only be set aside by 2/3 majority in the HoC. Does anyone think that is achievable, unless a significant number of Tory MP's join the SNP and Labour to act?
The DUP could choose to abstain on this one....but that is not a reliable prediction. They say that they will not support a vote of confidence raised by Labour, but remain bullish about a GE.
We will find out in the New Year whether Turkeys will vote for Christmas!
-
I notice that May was repeating her old mantra that the alternative to leaving with a deal (ie her deal) was leaving without a deal. The ruling on Article 50 makes that position untenable now.
-
I assume the 1922 Committee will now get the 48 votes required to trigger a leadership vote.
Do the Tories support May to prevent Gove/Johnson/Rees-Smug gaining control, or is there another option to hold the rabid right at arms length?
After she falls (or is pushed) a new leader does not change the numbers game. It just puts someone else in the intractable position of leading a government without power.
They can choose to plough on, but to what end?
The key point is that a government needs a working majority, and that can only be delivered by a GE.
But there is a further problem that the fixed term parliament act can only be set aside by 2/3 majority in the HoC. Does anyone think that is achievable, unless a significant number of Tory MP's join the SNP and Labour to act?
The DUP could choose to abstain on this one....but that is not a reliable prediction. They say that they will not support a vote of confidence raised by Labour, but remain bullish about a GE.
We will find out in the New Year whether Turkeys will vote for Christmas!
I'd have thought her position is much more dangerous now than it was this morning. The drive (such as it is) for a no-confidence vote has been coming from the Hard Brexiteers. Now she's going to try and renegotiate her supposedly non-negotiatiable deal I'm struggling to see why Soft Brexiteers and Remainers should retain confidence in her.
Also it strikes me that the whole point of dodging the Commons vote was to avoid the danger of a General Election. All May has done is delayed the inevitable.
I'm not that convinced that the next leader would be a Hard Brexiteer. It's a question of them coalescing around one figure who can then appeal to enough non-Hard Brexiteer Tories to ensure they reach the members ballot. Last time the Hard Brexit vote went several ways while the centre of the party was able to get behind May. It's more likely that someone like Hunt or Javid would win out.
Whether that takes us any further forward is anyone's guess.
-
The pound has slumped to a 20 month low today.
More turbulence across all sectors until some stability is restored.
Meanwhile, Treez has been spending well on her wheeze;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/10/almost-100k-of-public-money-spent-on-brexit-deal-facebook-ads
It is now so dysfunctional we could be in a Trump scenario. A mentally unstable egotist making irrational decisions to shore up their own position.
What are the provisions for removing an incumbent showing clear signs of delusional impairment?
-
I notice that May was repeating her old mantra that the alternative to leaving with a deal (ie her deal) was leaving without a deal. The ruling on Article 50 makes that position untenable now.
I would like to state what I really think of Mrs May and the mess she had presided over but I am afraid I would be banned from this Forum
I like it on here and would not jeapordise my "membership", and heres another thing - you CAN believe me more than that (delete all further potential text.....................................) Mrs May. How can anyone believe ANYTHING she ever says again ?
If I were a Barman in the HOC Bar serving her tonight and she ordered a "G&T on the Rocks" I would just have to ask - are you SURE ?
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
Wait and see. It's not failed yet
-
So I'll ask again BS.
What do you expect her to renegotiate with the EU?
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
Wait and see. It's not failed yet
Wow, what a plan. Forgive for being underwhelmed. As useless as May is, even she knows the value of having a contingency plan. But not you, apparently.
It's not failed yet? Yes it has - the EU aren't going to renegotiate and the Commons aren't going to vote for the deal. Now what?
-
I see that the opinion on here is now 53.7% in favour of a second referendum to possibly overturn the Brexit vote.
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
I dare say they are worried about being ambushed by a No-Confidence vote. Although Corbyn seems loathe to push that particular button. Tactically I can see his point- if there's one thing that will unite the Tories it's a No-Confidence motion. On the other hand, the country is crying out for some leadership.
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
I dare say they are worried about being ambushed by a No-Confidence vote. Although Corbyn seems loathe to push that particular button. Tactically I can see his point- if there's one thing that will unite the Tories it's a No-Confidence motion. On the other hand, the country is crying out for some leadership.
Timing is everything, and at the minute no one is sure where the DUP lie
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
I dare say they are worried about being ambushed by a No-Confidence vote. Although Corbyn seems loathe to push that particular button. Tactically I can see his point- if there's one thing that will unite the Tories it's a No-Confidence motion. On the other hand, the country is crying out for some leadership.
Timing is everything, and at the minute no one is sure where the DUP lie
Wherever is best for them as always.
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
-
By the way she's done the right thing cancelling the vote. She had no chance to win it so why bother? Equally nobody will know why she accepted a deal nobody wanted.
-
By the way she's done the right thing cancelling the vote. She had no chance to win it so why bother? Equally nobody will know why she accepted a deal nobody wanted.
Totally un democratic, cancelling the vote, 4 days of debating down the pan, plus the £100k of public money spent on social media in the last week
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
I dare say they are worried about being ambushed by a No-Confidence vote. Although Corbyn seems loathe to push that particular button. Tactically I can see his point- if there's one thing that will unite the Tories it's a No-Confidence motion. On the other hand, the country is crying out for some leadership.
Timing is everything, and at the minute no one is sure where the DUP lie
Wherever is best for them as always.
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
.... and they have Zero power because they got Votes totalling 2,415,916 (7.9% of the total Votes and got 8 Seats or 1.2% of the Seats in Parliament)
Contrast that with Labour who got 9,347,273 Votes (30.4% of the total votes just about 4 times as many as Libs - but got 232 Seats or 35% of the Seats in Parliament)
... and worst of all The DUP who have T May over a barrel - and screwed massive comcessions out of her to prop up this shambles of a Govt ?
Votes 184,260 just 0.6% of the popular vote which gave them 8 Seats same as the Libs - for the same 1.2% of the Seats available, Enough to prop up Maybot
PR needs to come and I hope it comes soon after this omnishambles
-
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
Ahem. Did you miss the fact that the party that has consistently stated that it wanted to remain in Europe lost 10% of its MP's last week when one of them resigned the whip so as to be able to vote for May's Brexit deal? How sick must he be today at destroying his political career over something that wont now happen!
-
The Tories are running scared, they have issued a 3 line whip all week
I dare say they are worried about being ambushed by a No-Confidence vote. Although Corbyn seems loathe to push that particular button. Tactically I can see his point- if there's one thing that will unite the Tories it's a No-Confidence motion. On the other hand, the country is crying out for some leadership.
Timing is everything, and at the minute no one is sure where the DUP lie
Wherever is best for them as always.
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
.... and they have Zero power because they got Votes totalling 2,415,916 (7.9% of the total Votes and got 8 Seats or 1.2% of the Seats in Parliament)
Contrast that with Labour who got 9,347,273 Votes (30.4% of the total votes just about 4 times as many as Libs - but got 232 Seats or 35% of the Seats in Parliament)
... and worst of all The DUP who have T May over a barrel - and screwed massive comcessions out of her to prop up this shambles of a Govt ?
Votes 184,260 just 0.6% of the popular vote which gave them 8 Seats same as the Libs - for the same 1.2% of the Seats available, Enough to prop up Maybot
PR needs to come and I hope it comes soon after this omnishambles
Be very careful what you wish for Wolfie. In the 2015 GE UKIP won 12.5% of the vote. Under PR that would have given them about 70 MP's.
-
Wilts
And so they should have had.
Our electoral system is an outrage against democratic principles in a non-binary system and cannot be defended by anyone who isn't happy with the fact that a party can win effectively unfettered power with the votes of no more than 37-38% of those cast and 25% of the electorate.
It is particularly outrageous for a party which stands a lot going way from the political centre of gravity to win power like that.
-
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
Ahem. Did you miss the fact that the party that has consistently stated that it wanted to remain in Europe lost 10% of its MP's last week when one of them resigned the whip so as to be able to vote for May's Brexit deal? How sick must he be today at destroying his political career over something that wont now happen!
In the case of Labour Wilts, I think you're confusing "Leadership" with "Party". Or even "Leader's Office" with "Pretty much everyone else in the party".
I understand your confusion though, given that Corbyn has spent a lifetime saying the membership should determine policy.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonCowleyNS/status/1072189546211753984
Amen to that.
-
I'm not really sure where any party lies. Tories are a mess, labour critical but what policy? He lib dems are probably most clear but easy to say when you have zero power.
Ahem. Did you miss the fact that the party that has consistently stated that it wanted to remain in Europe lost 10% of its MP's last week when one of them resigned the whip so as to be able to vote for May's Brexit deal? How sick must he be today at destroying his political career over something that wont now happen!
Yes, I don't see every single speck of news and right now there's lots of it.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonCowleyNS/status/1072189546211753984
Amen to that.
Indeed, of any potential leader he's the worst of them.
-
BFYP
That bas**rd, more than anyone, tipped us into this hole.
He was the most dangerous of politicians. A brilliant communicator who could whip up fervour, but who believed in nothing but his own ego and ambitions. He is the sort of politician who shows up all the weaknesses of democracy. How people who don't really engage in the topics can be misled by a Kitson who comes across as a bit of a lad.
And when push came to shove, he wasn't even capable of clinching the deal that was the whole point of his manoeuvring: getting himself to be PM. So he's f**ked the country and not even got what he wanted.
I hope the bas**rd spends all eternity being buggered by the three headed hound of Hell.
-
Snapping on your rubber gloves already, are you, BST.?
-
Great resources these two brexit threads although there is no reason not to combine them, thanks for all the informed comments it takes a lot of the hard work out of catching up if I'm too busy to read the press.
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
Wait and see. It's not failed yet
Wow, what a plan. Forgive for being underwhelmed. As useless as May is, even she knows the value of having a contingency plan. But not you, apparently.
It's not failed yet? Yes it has - the EU aren't going to renegotiate and the Commons aren't going to vote for the deal. Now what?
The EU will negotiate on certain issuee, and the commons can be persuaded. Because if that doesn't happen, it's a hard brexit.
To me it's the EU that are failing in keeping the 6th largest economy in their flawed political union.
-
b*llocks..
It’s the UK wanting to leave their club, so why shouldn’t we have to respect their terms.??
I can’t see a hard brexit, the government will delay article 50 until they can wrangle a better leave deal or if not there will eventually be another referendum, which remain will win because there is likely to be no realistic brexit outcome, so the government can turn wash their hands of the own thing..
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
Wait and see. It's not failed yet
Wow, what a plan. Forgive for being underwhelmed. As useless as May is, even she knows the value of having a contingency plan. But not you, apparently.
It's not failed yet? Yes it has - the EU aren't going to renegotiate and the Commons aren't going to vote for the deal. Now what?
The EU will negotiate on certain issuee, and the commons can be persuaded. Because if that doesn't happen, it's a hard brexit.
To me it's the EU that are failing in keeping the 6th largest economy in their flawed political union.
If the EU improve the deal they will make more problems for themselves as they will upset the remaining 27 nations plus there may be some nation that also have uninformed people that may start to make brexit noises.
-
Go on then BS.
How do we proceed from here?
Not "what do you want to happen?" "What, practically CAN happen?"
Renegotiate with the EU (probably won't happen) or persuade MPs it's the only deal we will get .
And when they inevitably fail? What will you do then?
Wait and see. It's not failed yet
Wow, what a plan. Forgive for being underwhelmed. As useless as May is, even she knows the value of having a contingency plan. But not you, apparently.
It's not failed yet? Yes it has - the EU aren't going to renegotiate and the Commons aren't going to vote for the deal. Now what?
The EU will negotiate on certain issuee, and the commons can be persuaded. Because if that doesn't happen, it's a hard brexit.
To me it's the EU that are failing in keeping the 6th largest economy in their flawed political union.
Ah, the old 'ignore reality and cross my fingers and hope' plan, eh?
The EU have already said they are not renegotiating, and May knows the Commons can't be persuaded hence postponing the vote whilst crossing her fingers and hoping.
And the Commons as it is will revoke Article 50 rather than have a no deal Brexit.
As for the EU, it's us that's stuck two fingers up to them, not the other way round. They also know we ain't going to be the 6th largest economy for very long after Brexit!
-
BS
Again.
WHAT issues do you want us to renegotiate with the EU?
You don't want the PM to go to Brussels and say, "Let's have a chat about stuff and see what we can change that nobody's thought of in the past 2 years" do you?
-
Leadsom today openly questioning the impartiality of the Speaker of the House. Do any of these Brexiters have any concept of hypocrisy at all? You say you want to take back control, and then you attack Parliament, the Speaker, and the Lords when they don't let you run roughshod over British institutions.
-
.... and they forget the irony of The (then) Speaker Betty Boothroyd (who was Labout MP for West Brom - and had to give that up as she became Speaker) had to use her Casting Vote when a crucial part of the Maastricht Vote in 1993 was tied.
That must have been a real gut wrencher for her as she had to Vote "against" her own Party and lots of minor Parties and thus Vote with the Tories.
All I see is them making The Speaker a "scapegoat" for their own inadequacies
-
more groundless claims from Brexit fans.
what evidence is there that he EU is a 'flawed' political union ?
I think the UK fits that description better at the moment.
WhenBrexit is cancelled, the sensible majority will pretend, with relief, that the entire embarrassing spectacle never happened. And the minority can have their "treachery" narrative which, frankly, is all they ever really wanted anyway.
The delusion, exceptionalism and outright stupidity just never ends #r4today
-
Leadsom today openly questioning the impartiality of the Speaker of the House.
another sign of desperation by the government. No doubt "someone" from May's office discussed this with "someone" from Leadsom's office, which has lead to this being mentioned in an interview.
-
.... and they forget the irony of The (then) Speaker Betty Boothroyd (who was Labout MP for West Brom - and had to give that up as she became Speaker) had to use her Casting Vote when a crucial part of the Maastricht Vote in 1993 was tied.
And you've forget I've already told you once she didn't use her casting vote in that way - it is the convention for ANY Speaker to cast a vote to pass something - whatever it is - to progress so that MPs aren't denied the opportunity to debate it and vote on it further. It's part of Parliamentary procedure.
EDIT: What's ironic, exactly?
-
more groundless claims from Brexit fans.
what evidence is there that he EU is a 'flawed' political union ?
I suspect the forthcoming treatment of France may well answer that - we will see!
The EU is nothing close to perfect and has many flaws. Just because Brexit is not smooth it doesn't mean the EU is now perfect.
Interesting that the SNP may now call the no confidence vote - I suspect that's what Corbyn wants - lose (which they most likely will) it wasn't him, win he may well gain!
-
more groundless claims from Brexit fans.
what evidence is there that he EU is a 'flawed' political union ?
I suspect the forthcoming treatment of France may well answer that - we will see!
The EU is nothing close to perfect and has many flaws. Just because Brexit is not smooth it doesn't mean the EU is now perfect.
Interesting that the SNP may now call the no confidence vote - I suspect that's what Corbyn wants - lose (which they most likely will) it wasn't him, win he may well gain!
If Corbyn really wants a General Election, he won't want to waste a no confidence vote when he knows it'll fail because you can't call one every five minutes. He'd want to be sure the DUP are going to stab May in the back first.
-
.... and they forget the irony of The (then) Speaker Betty Boothroyd (who was Labout MP for West Brom - and had to give that up as she became Speaker) had to use her Casting Vote when a crucial part of the Maastricht Vote in 1993 was tied.
And you've forget I've already told you once she didn't use her casting vote in that way - it is the convention for ANY Speaker to cast a vote to pass something - whatever it is - to progress so that MPs aren't denied the opportunity to debate it and vote on it further. It's part of Parliamentary procedure.
EDIT: What's ironic, exactly?
I know you did - I remember my Vote in 75 as well as my first Rovers Game - no senility here
I know what she did and the irony for me is they say The Speaker a Tory MP who had to resign to take up that post is accused of not being impartial ...... whereas .... however we flower it they got the support of a Labour Politician (Speaker) to keep their Vote / Debate / Procedural call it what you will "alive"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-maastricht-debate-former-mp-firm-in-casting-vote-the-speaker-rare-intervention-keeps-boothroyd-1486494.html
-
Boothroyd used the vote in the pursuit of impartiality! That's why it's Parliamentary procedure!
What do you think Bercow had to resign to take up the post?
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
Be careful what you wish for though the next leader could be far far worse.
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
Be careful what you wish for though the next leader could be far far worse.
Thats your opinion, he’d have to be pretty bad to beat the present one
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
Be careful what you wish for though the next leader could be far far worse.
Thats your opinion, he’d have to be pretty bad to beat the present one
BoJo the Clown would be much worse. Or Michael f**king Gove.
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
Be careful what you wish for though the next leader could be far far worse.
Thats your opinion, he’d have to be pretty bad to beat the present one
BoJo the Clown would be much worse. Or Michael f**king Gove.
I’m thinking more of the opposition than Billy Smarts Circus
-
I feel a no confidence motion coming very soon, can we strand the Maybot over there without the plane fare home if that happens while she’s away, or will she be ATOL covered 😀
Be careful what you wish for though the next leader could be far far worse.
Thats your opinion, he’d have to be pretty bad to beat the present one
You are assuming it's a he. I suspect you're thinking it will be Corbyn, you're 10x more likely to get a Rees Mogg etc - not what we need!
-
Corbyn's in a very "interesting" situation.
The DUP have said clearly that they will not side with Labour in a confidence vote against the Govt if May's deal is defeated. They imply that they WOULD vote against the Govt if May's deal passes.
That means Corbyn's best outcome is for the May deal to pass, THEN have a vote of no confidence, at which point the DUP may well help bring down the Govt.
That would be the end of May as PM, but not necessarily the end of the Tory Govt.
Presumably, the DUP would not support ANY Tory PM who tried to implement the NI backstop. But if Parliament had just voted FOR a deal with the backstop before the no confidence vote, then God alone knows what the constitutional position would be.
-
Fascinating seeing the key people in the EU all lining up to insist that there will be no change to the Withdrawal Agreement.
Juncker's said it.
Varadker has said it.
Tusk has said it.
Here's a prediction.
May comes back with some meaningless words about how the EU will take the UK Parliament's opinions into account when it comes to exiting the backstop, and there will be a big PR blitz from the PM's office saying, "Look how strong she is! They all said there would be no change of policy, but she'd battered them into accepting a change!"
Just watch it unroll this week...
-
“I have in my hand, a piece of paper”
-
You don't want to know the image that has just conjured up in my mind.
Let's just say that, given May's recent performances, I'm not sure she's competent to wipe her own arse.
-
I’ve just backed Gove to be the next PM 12/1.
-
Fascinating seeing the key people in the EU all lining up to insist that there will be no change to the Withdrawal Agreement.
Juncker's said it.
Varadker has said it.
Tusk has said it.
Here's a prediction.
May comes back with some meaningless words about how the EU will take the UK Parliament's opinions into account when it comes to exiting the backstop, and there will be a big PR blitz from the PM's office saying, "Look how strong she is! They all said there would be no change of policy, but she'd battered them into accepting a change!"
Just watch it unroll this week...
Sounds like a very plausible scenario. Also she isn't planning to hold the vote until around 21st January. Which allows a month for horse-trading and arm-twisting. Also by the time of the vote we'll be two months away from Brexit Day, so expect lots of warnings about ticking clocks.
-
I’ve just backed Gove to be the next PM 12/1.
Someone has told me to lump on Gove. I'll have to hold my nose...
-
I’ve just backed Gove to be the next PM 12/1.
Someone has told me to lump on Gove. I'll have to hold my nose...
I’d rather they give it to Mark Weaver than him I think, but if they do... £££
-
Christ Gaz.
His face is an even more gut-wrenching image than what I was thinking about before.
It'd be thoroughly depressing if Gove got it. He's another one who believes in nothing but his own career. As a colleague of his said recently, Gove's ongoing wrestling match with his conscience is the longest unbeaten run in sporting history. His smug comment on the eve of the vote along the lines of "Oh, I think the public is fed up with listening to the opinions of experts" is a line that will define the clusterf**k that he had a major part in taking us into.
But I don't think the Tory party will choose him. He'd be an electoral liability. In an era when Ed Milliband's career was destroyed because of him looking a bit weird, would the country really vote for someone who looks like he's permanently being buggered by a cactus - and he's enjoying it?
-
Another day, another public flogging of the PM.
https://twitter.com/GeorgeFreemanMP/status/1072540881494925318
This just does not happen in normal times. This is unprecedented in the past 80 years. You simply do not have MPs lining up to publicly humiliate their own PM.
-
And this...this is enough to make me feel sorry even for May.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x5MUxcspCE
What a metaphor! Europe stood waiting while the PM's team can't work out how to open a car door.
-
Rumours on t'internet that the 48 letters have been received - and ERG to publish the names of the MP's who have told them they sent one just to ensure they did!! I guess we shall see tomorrow.
-
Rumours on t'internet that the 48 letters have been received - and ERG to publish the names of the MP's who have told them they sent one just to ensure they did!! I guess we shall see tomorrow.
Non of them trust each other, they’ve all got the knives out to back stab each other, the loonatics a truley taken over
-
Rumours on t'internet that the 48 letters have been received - and ERG to publish the names of the MP's who have told them they sent one just to ensure they did!! I guess we shall see tomorrow.
That’s possibly why the pound slumped late on after rallying.
-
Gove is actually the sensible option imo. Yes he's a politician (newsflash they're all selfish) but actually quite a clever one.
I still maintain Corbyn doesn't want to be pm aswell. He would bloody well struggle to do everything he's said he can do and he knows it.
-
He's a clever something.
-
He’s a horrific little beast.
-
He’s got a face that you’d never get tired of punching, the f**king horrible little weasle
-
Fox is a weasel ! Grayling is a Weasel ! Even though ones a mammal and ones a fish
-
Is there anyone, on any side of the political coin, who we can trust to be PM at the moment.?
-
Is there anyone, on any side of the political coin, who we can trust to be PM at the moment.?
Starmer?
-
Is there anyone, on any side of the political coin, who we can trust to be PM at the moment.?
Starmer?
😂😂😂😂😂😂
-
Barry Gardiner.
-
Hopefully the Tories go with JRM. No one will take them seriously.
-
Starmer is the only politician in the country who is coming out of this shit storm with his reputation enhanced.
He's been strategic, calm, prepared to face down his own leader, consistent and in control of the facts.
-
Starmer is the only politician in the country who is coming out of this shit storm with his reputation enhanced.
He's been strategic, calm, prepared to face down his own leader, consistent and in control of the facts.
😂😂😂 Jesus wept. It's easy saying what someone shouldn't do, whilst not saying what they should do.
Non entity,
-
Aye BS
On which note...
Still waiting for you to tell us what May should be renegotiating.
Take your time.
-
Aye BS
On which note...
Still waiting for you to tell us what May should be renegotiating.
Take your time.
I think that's pretty obvious even for you, but I'll say it anyway.
Reassurances on the backstop, to make sure we're not stuck with it indefinately.
Do keep up old lad
-
Reassurances?
You'd go into a negotiation asking for reassurances?
That's just made my day.
I thought you were all for going in balls out and telling Europe what they can do with their deal?
Sounds like you're now wanting Merkel et al to give us pinky promises that they'll not be beastly to us in future.
Reassurances? Really?
-
Reassurances?
You'd go into a negotiation asking for reassurances?
That's just made my day.
I thought you we all for going in balls out and telling Europe what they can do with their deal?
Sounds like you're now wanting Merkel et al to give us pinky promises that they'll not be beastly to us in future.
Reassurances? Really?
I'd leave now, this moment, and would fall back on WTO terms,
or withhold the tens of billions we're gonna pay them, that they are desperate for until they concede certain issues.
However May, who were talking about here is doing something different.
Try and keep up, please.
-
Reassurances?
You'd go into a negotiation asking for reassurances?
That's just made my day.
I thought you we all for going in balls out and telling Europe what they can do with their deal?
Sounds like you're now wanting Merkel et al to give us pinky promises that they'll not be beastly to us in future.
Reassurances? Really?
I'd leave now, this moment, and would fall back on WTO terms,
or withhold the tens of billions we're gonna pay them, that they are desperate for until they concede certain issues.
However May, who were talking about here is doing something different.
Try and keep up, please.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs
-
Starmer is the only politician in the country who is coming out of this shit storm with his reputation enhanced.
He's been strategic, calm, prepared to face down his own leader, consistent and in control of the facts.
I agree he has been concise but I actually after he's in the easy position. Labour's strategy of "we'd just negotiate better" is fantasy though. They were touching on this on the radio this morning, discussing why Corbyn is not pushing for no confidence in government and mentioning how behind it all they'd be in a very similar position in that there are multiple demands within his party.
As BST has said, who'd want to be PM right now?
-
Reassurances?
You'd go into a negotiation asking for reassurances?
That's just made my day.
I thought you we all for going in balls out and telling Europe what they can do with their deal?
Sounds like you're now wanting Merkel et al to give us pinky promises that they'll not be beastly to us in future.
Reassurances? Really?
I'd leave now, this moment, and would fall back on WTO terms,
or withhold the tens of billions we're gonna pay them, that they are desperate for until they concede certain issues.
However May, who were talking about here is doing something different.
Try and keep up, please.
There speaks someone who has no idea what 'WTO terms' really are.
You really ought to try and keep up, you know.
-
Starmer is the only politician in the country who is coming out of this shit storm with his reputation enhanced.
He's been strategic, calm, prepared to face down his own leader, consistent and in control of the facts.
I agree he has been concise but I actually after he's in the easy position. Labour's strategy of "we'd just negotiate better" is fantasy though. They were touching on this on the radio this morning, discussing why Corbyn is not pushing for no confidence in government and mentioning how behind it all they'd be in a very similar position in that there are multiple demands within his party.
As BST has said, who'd want to be PM right now?
BFYP
With respect, you're not seeing the big picture here.
There are effectively two ways we can leave the EU.
We can remove ourselves from ALL the EU's systems and agreements. That's what Farage, Rees-Mogg and the ERG want.
Or we can stay inside some of the systems and agreements. That is where Starmer has been positioning Labour admittedly, having to pull Corbyn kicking and screaming into the real world.
Either one of those is a relatively easy thing to negotiate with the EU. The former, because we're effectively saying to them "we don't want or need you". The latter because we're effectively saying, "we want to retain a close relationship, based on many of the processes that are already working."
Starmer has spent the past two years talking to EU leaders and negotiators and laying the path for that sort of Brexit, if Labour were in a position to implement it. It has consequences. It means that we would remain bound by many of the rules of the EU systems. But it would be the least economically damaging Brexit.
May's problem is that she is being dragged towards the hard leave by the ERG-wing of her party, but she knows that would be economically catastrophic. So she's tried to negotiate a deal which keeps many of the benefits of retaining close links with the EU whilst satisfying the ERG that we have all the benefits of totally leaving. So she announced that we'd be leaving the SM and the CU (to satisfy the ERG) but then wants the benefits of close trade with the EU (which has led the EU to insist that we have the NI backstop).
That is an impossible deal to produce. As some of us have been saying for two years, and as she's now finally realising.
So, with respect, saying that Starmer would have no easier a job negotiating with the EU misses the point. He and Labour would have a FAR easier job, because they are starting from a different position, and looking for a more realistic outcome. Sure, Labour would have to address the criticism that their Brexit wasn't actually Brexit, but that's one for Labour to address with the electorate, not with the EU.
-
Corbyn pushed May and the govt to maintain the parliamentary schedule finsh the 5 day debate and have the vote.
-
Starmer is the only politician in the country who is coming out of this shit storm with his reputation enhanced.
He's been strategic, calm, prepared to face down his own leader, consistent and in control of the facts.
I agree he has been concise but I actually after he's in the easy position. Labour's strategy of "we'd just negotiate better" is fantasy though. They were touching on this on the radio this morning, discussing why Corbyn is not pushing for no confidence in government and mentioning how behind it all they'd be in a very similar position in that there are multiple demands within his party.
As BST has said, who'd want to be PM right now?
BFYP
With respect, you're not seeing the big picture here.
There are effectively two ways we can leave the EU.
We can remove ourselves from ALL the EU's systems and agreements. That's what Farage, Rees-Mogg and the ERG want.
Or we can stay inside some of the systems and agreements. That is where Starmer has been positioning Labour admittedly, having to pull Corbyn kicking and screaming into the real world.
Either one of those is a relatively easy thing to negotiate with the EU. The former, because we're effectively saying to them "we don't want or need you". The latter because we're effectively saying, "we want to retain a close relationship, based on many of the processes that are already working."
Starmer has spent the past two years talking to EU leaders and negotiators and laying the path for that sort of Brexit, if Labour were in a position to implement it. It has consequences. It means that we would remain bound by many of the rules of the EU systems. But it would be the least economically damaging Brexit.
May's problem is that she is being dragged towards the hard leave by the ERG-wing of her party, but she knows that would be economically catastrophic. So she's tried to negotiate a deal which keeps many of the benefits of retaining close links with the EU whilst satisfying the ERG that we have all the benefits of totally leaving. So she announced that we'd be leaving the SM and the CU (to satisfy the ERG) but then wants the benefits of close trade with the EU (which has led the EU to insist that we have the NI backstop).
That is an impossible deal to produce. As some of us have been saying for two years, and as she's now finally realising.
So, with respect, saying that Starmer would have no easier a job negotiating with the EU misses the point. He and Labour would have a FAR easier job, because they are starting from a different position, and looking for a more realistic outcome. Sure, Labour would have to address the criticism that their Brexit wasn't actually Brexit, but that's one for Labour to address with the electorate, not with the EU.
I take what you're saying. The point I would make is that they then themselves would be unlikely to get it past parliament would they? Not unless they won a general election with huge majorities, which is unlikely. Granted if they were to go with the customs union option they may well get snp support which could be decisive for them. But there are many in the labour party as you say who may not back it. It's a tough one for Corbyn too, follow his party or his instincts. In some ways a problem of his own making.
-
Did anyone hear the German and Polish politician on Radio 4 this morning?
When asked the German said there was no possibility of renegotiation as we had got a very good deal out of the EU. However when the Polish gentleman was asked the same question, he was very strongly of the opinion that in the interests of his country and citizens living in the UK that ANY DEAL with us would be preferable to no deal. Now this is directly the opposite of the line we are being fed by TM. So does this show who has the whip hand in the EU?
-
Did anyone hear the German and Polish politician on Radio 4 this morning?
When asked the German said there was no possibility of renegotiation as we had got a very good deal out of the EU. However when the Polish gentleman was asked the same question, he was very strongly of the opinion that in the interests of his country and citizens living in the UK that ANY DEAL with us would be preferable to no deal. Now this is directly the opposite of the line we are being fed by TM. So does this show who has the whip hand in the EU?
Has the thought that TM has been bullshitting us for the past two years not crossed your mind?
-
Did anyone hear the German and Polish politician on Radio 4 this morning?
When asked the German said there was no possibility of renegotiation as we had got a very good deal out of the EU. However when the Polish gentleman was asked the same question, he was very strongly of the opinion that in the interests of his country and citizens living in the UK that ANY DEAL with us would be preferable to no deal. Now this is directly the opposite of the line we are being fed by TM. So does this show who has the whip hand in the EU?
Has the thought that TM has been bullshitting us for the past two years not crossed your mind?
Exactly the point. So you agree we should have been playing hardball with the EU as it seems from the above that other members would negotiate properly but have been over ruled by the Germans and their mates in France.
-
AL.
I'll ask again. What concessions should we have got from the EU?
What were our strong negotiating cards to force those concessions?
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
If what you want is what the EU has said we can't have right from the start, and they said it before the referendum, then anybody still thinking they can get it after the referendum must have had their head up their backsides for the past two and a half years.
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
If what you want is what the EU has said we can't have right from the start, and they said it before the referendum, then anybody still thinking they can get it after the referendum must have had their head up their backsides for the past two and a half years.
Which is why I would walk away, but that was not what it sounded like the Polish guy wanted to happen.
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
If what you want is what the EU has said we can't have right from the start, and they said it before the referendum, then anybody still thinking they can get it after the referendum must have had their head up their backsides for the past two and a half years.
Which is why I would walk away, but that was not what it sounded like the Polish guy wanted to happen.
Well, if you're happy for the UK to get shafted in the ten years or so it'll take to negotiate trade deals, I can tell you I'm not.
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
If what you want is what the EU has said we can't have right from the start, and they said it before the referendum, then anybody still thinking they can get it after the referendum must have had their head up their backsides for the past two and a half years.
Which is why I would walk away, but that was not what it sounded like the Polish guy wanted to happen.
Well, if you're happy for the UK to get shafted in the ten years or so it'll take to negotiate trade deals, I can tell you I'm not.
Shafted in what way?
-
What I want they won't give, but the Polish guy seemed to give the impression that they would be more flexible than what the EU in general are at the moment if a deal is the way we are going?
I want a no deal Brexit, so what I think is irrelevant really.
If what you want is what the EU has said we can't have right from the start, and they said it before the referendum, then anybody still thinking they can get it after the referendum must have had their head up their backsides for the past two and a half years.
Which is why I would walk away, but that was not what it sounded like the Polish guy wanted to happen.
Well, if you're happy for the UK to get shafted in the ten years or so it'll take to negotiate trade deals, I can tell you I'm not.
Shafted in what way?
In this way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtkP3Hkc1cM
-
So watch the video clip and tell exactly just what is SO clever about Brexit.
Can ANY Brexit fan tell me in what tangible way their family will be better off if we leave ?
just man up and admit you were conned with all the others.
-
Foxbat
You're wasting your time.
The standard responses are:
1) We'll be better off. The overwhelming number of economists are wrong and/or Project Fear mongers.
2)It won't affect me. It'll only affect banks and big business. (Jesus wept...)
3) Sovereignty is more important than losing the equivalent of the entire NHS budget from our economy for the next several decades.
-
Don’t forget
4) we had the referendum and leave won, so we leave, end of, and bugger the consequences..
-
This is f**king gold dust.
'On Thursday, Mrs May told EU leaders: "Over the last two years, I hope that I have shown you that you can trust me to do what is right, not always what is easy, however that difficult that might be for me politically."
'She asked them to trust her judgement, adding: "There is a majority in my Parliament who want to leave with a deal, so with the right assurances this deal can be passed. Indeed, it is the only deal that is capable of getting through my Parliament." '
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46560807
"I hope I've shown you can trust me" followed by "There is a majority in my Parliament who want to leave with a deal."
She obviously treats the other EU leaders with as much contempt as she treats the rest of us.
The whole f**king point is that there ISN'T a majority for any SPECIFIC deal.
Does she think that the other leaders are stupid? Does she think they won't have really smart advisers who will be sending them minutes of what the actual situation in the UK is? Does she think that bullshitting like this is going to help the image of the UK?
-
No she doesn't think they are stupid Billy, exactly the opposite. She is hoping they are clever than her and can come up with some ideas to save her plan - because she hasn't got any!!!
'After arriving in Brussels with promises to help the prime minister, European leaders were left amazed when she turned up without any developed requests or ideas.'
'Accounts of the meeting suggest the prime minister’s speech, in which she called for help to get the agreement “over the line”, was repeatedly interrupted by Angela Merkel asking her what she actually wanted from them.'
'Senior UK government officials admitted that the prime minister did not bring any documented proposals with her to the meeting.'
'The approach puzzled EU diplomats, who for days before the conference had said they needed to see what proposals Ms May had come up with before they could respond to her request for aid.'
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-eu-angela-merkel-scraps-plan-meeting-juncker-european-council-summit-a8682786.html
-
Richard Branson did a very good quick response to the bbc breakfast presenter when he was asked what his thoughts on Brexit were.
If we leave the EU and his thoughts turn to reality then it would appear that we, as a nation, are f**ked.
-
I genuinely don't have a clue what's the state of play now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46560807
It's obvious there's going to be no serious concession from the EU, but...
1) Are they hamming up how tough the EU is so that when May gets some meaningless change in wording, she can come back as the all conquering hero who battered the EU into a change.
2) Or is May just entirely out of her depth and having a nervous breakdown?
-
Apparently she actually used the words "Brexit means Brexit" last night as well. Jesus wept.
We're definitely in nervous breakdown territory.
-
God help us.
Must admit, I heard her on the radio yesterday being buttonholed by a journalist on the way into the summit and she sounded like a person about to crack. All short of breath and every sentence prefaced by a sharp "Err..." before going into the pre-programmed "What I am...err...clear about..." bullshit mode.
What we must look like to the rest of the world.
-
OK. It's getting clearer.
Look at the difference between the draft statements that May wanted, and the final official statements.
https://mobile.twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1073355214340743168
The EU has reached the end of its patience and told her to f**k off.
-
It's time Labour got behind May's deal and voted for it. Oh, wait..............................
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEqIHUDsQlc
Probably one of the most polite Put-Downs ever. :lol:
-
Hard to tell what the posturing is about and I'm not sure what will change. I suspect the eu will move in time but not yet.
If they don't move then there's no deal really is there?
-
BFYP
How are they supposed to move?
What's the mechanism to bring that about?
They have said from the get go that we do not get a trade deal with them that involves problems for Ireland. The ONLY way to ensure there are no problems for Ireland is to make sure there is no border with NI. The ONLY way to do that is to make sure NI stays in the CU. That's why the backstop comes in. And because we have demonstrated that we cannot be trusted (Tory ministers threatening to withhold money that we legally owe if we don't get our way, suggestions floated that we could make it difficult for Ireland to import food from British ports if we don't get our way. Dominic Raab hinting that we'd turn off gas pipelines to Ireland if we don't get our way) the EU insists that we cannot unilaterally revoke the backstop.
WE have brought this shitstorm on our own heads. I don't get what the EU is supposed to do. Ignore all that and betray one of their members? To help the British PM?
-
BFYP
How are they supposed to move?
What's the mechanism to bring that about?
They have said from the get go that we do not get a trade deal with them that involves problems for Ireland. The ONLY way to ensure there are no problems for Ireland is to make sure there is no border with NI. The ONLY way to do that is to make sure NI stays in the CU. That's why the backstop comes in. And because we have demonstrated that we cannot be trusted (Tory ministers threatening to withhold money that we legally owe if we don't get our way, suggestions floated that we could make it difficult for Ireland to import food from British ports if we don't get our way. Dominic Raab hinting that we'd turn off gas pipelines to Ireland if we don't get our way) the EU insists that we cannot unilaterally revoke the backstop.
WE have brought this shitstorm on our own heads. I don't get what the EU is supposed to do. Ignore all that and betray one of their members? To help the British PM?
You answered your own question there .
-
BFYP
How are they supposed to move?
What's the mechanism to bring that about?
They have said from the get go that we do not get a trade deal with them that involves problems for Ireland. The ONLY way to ensure there are no problems for Ireland is to make sure there is no border with NI. The ONLY way to do that is to make sure NI stays in the CU. That's why the backstop comes in. And because we have demonstrated that we cannot be trusted (Tory ministers threatening to withhold money that we legally owe if we don't get our way, suggestions floated that we could make it difficult for Ireland to import food from British ports if we don't get our way. Dominic Raab hinting that we'd turn off gas pipelines to Ireland if we don't get our way) the EU insists that we cannot unilaterally revoke the backstop.
WE have brought this shitstorm on our own heads. I don't get what the EU is supposed to do. Ignore all that and betray one of their members? To help the British PM?
If I knew the answer to that very complex question I'd probably have a much more interesting and exciting career than I do.... But with doing nothing they're heading for no deal. Perhaps that's what May will do. Videos such as her arguing with EU officials yesterday actually show her in a positive light - they should be seizing on that as an opportunity.
I do wonder if May's way out may well be to head towards no deal - worrying but possible.
-
You mean accounts doesn't thrill you to death? ;)
-
:) :) :)
:zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
-
BFYP
We are NOT going out with No Deal. Repeat to fade.
There are enough grown ups around to protect the country from that fantasy.
-
BFYP
We are NOT going out with No Deal. Repeat to fade.
There are enough grown ups around to protect the country from that fantasy.
If that's the case somebody is going to have to revoke Article 50. May's deal won't fly, there isn't time to negotiate anything else (even assuming the EU were prepared to) and the default is we leave on 29th March.
Could Parliament vote to revoke A50 and instruct the Government to do so? Not really how our system works, is it?
May has brought her humiliation (the vote of confidence by her MPs and now the snub from Juncker) on herself by pulling the vote on Tuesday. At least we would have had some numbers, and she could have said to the EU "this is how far we are away from agreeing my deal."
-
TRB,
There is a difference between revoking article 50, and seeking an extension.
Revoking Article 50 means choosing to remain, under the current terms. Here is a quick summary:
https://theconversation.com/article-50-can-be-revoked-heres-what-it-means-for-brexit-108522
I think that extending is more likely in the near term.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/G4Rss4k.jpg)
-
BFYP
We are NOT going out with No Deal. Repeat to fade.
There are enough grown ups around to protect the country from that fantasy.
If that's the case somebody is going to have to revoke Article 50. May's deal won't fly, there isn't time to negotiate anything else (even assuming the EU were prepared to) and the default is we leave on 29th March.
Could Parliament vote to revoke A50 and instruct the Government to do so? Not really how our system works, is it?
May has brought her humiliation (the vote of confidence by her MPs and now the snub from Juncker) on herself by pulling the vote on Tuesday. At least we would have had some numbers, and she could have said to the EU "this is how far we are away from agreeing my deal."
That's where the Dominic Grieve amendment comes in
He put an amendment to the Brexit bill that in the case of May's bill being defeated then the the commons will assert "their sovereignty" take control of the next phase and as there IS a majority in the house to remain hopefully they will revoke article 50
-
BFYP
We are NOT going out with No Deal. Repeat to fade.
There are enough grown ups around to protect the country from that fantasy.
If that's the case somebody is going to have to revoke Article 50. May's deal won't fly, there isn't time to negotiate anything else (even assuming the EU were prepared to) and the default is we leave on 29th March.
Could Parliament vote to revoke A50 and instruct the Government to do so? Not really how our system works, is it?
May has brought her humiliation (the vote of confidence by her MPs and now the snub from Juncker) on herself by pulling the vote on Tuesday. At least we would have had some numbers, and she could have said to the EU "this is how far we are away from agreeing my deal."
That's where the Dominic Grieve amendment comes in
He put an amendment to the Brexit bill that in the case of May's bill being defeated then the the commons will assert "their sovereignty" take control of the next phase and as there IS a majority in the house to remain hopefully they will revoke article 50
Very democratic. Just listen to yourself.
-
That literally is democracy though...?
-
Aye, they only like Parliament taking back its sovereignty when it's the way they want... :)
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
We got the right result at the 2017 General Election, didn't we? You know, the vote we had after the referendum?
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
We got the right result at the 2017 General Election, didn't we? You know, the vote we had after the referendum?
But a general election is every five years at least. How many referendums will we be having?
-
Don’t you see the irony there.? A GE can be overturned in a few years but a brexit vote can’t..
So, we leave the EU and say 7-8 years downstream the public groundswell is that this was a mistake and we want back in.. how do we deal with that eh.?
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
I hate to keep saying it - and said I wouldnt again - BUT in 1975 we voted in effect to join (Remain in) the Common Market after having a trial 2 years of Mmebership
10 times more people voted to Remain in 1975 (Majority was 33% - 66-33) than voted Leave in 2016 where 3 or 4% Majority said Leave 52-48 ish
That 75 Vote was never respected by those Tories and others who wanted us out - so apply the same to them ! Keep nagging and nagging till you get a Vote you like the result of
Cameron was STUPID to call a Referendum anyway - and worse for not saying for it to change it had to be voted for at least 60% of those voting
-
And of course, as I keep saying... Nigel Farage himself said if he lost it would be unfinished business.
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
I hate to keep saying it - and said I wouldnt again - BUT in 1975 we voted in effect to join (Remain in) the Common Market after having a trial 2 years of Mmebership
10 times more people voted to Remain in 1975 (Majority was 33% - 66-33) than voted Leave in 2016 where 3 or 4% Majority said Leave 52-48 ish
That 75 Vote was never respected by those Tories and others who wanted us out - so apply the same to them ! Keep nagging and nagging till you get a Vote you like the result of
Cameron was STUPID to call a Referendum anyway - and worse for not saying for it to change it had to be voted for at least 60% of those voting
Fair enough we'll have another referendum in another 40 years if the human race still exists.
-
I will be on a Hat trick - Voting for losing side three times in a Row maybe ?
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
We got the right result at the 2017 General Election, didn't we? You know, the vote we had after the referendum?
But a general election is every five years at least. How many referendums will we be having?
Doesn't matter. Each electiop supercedes the previous one, regardless of the length of time between them. That makes the 2017 election more relevant than any before it.
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
We got the right result at the 2017 General Election, didn't we? You know, the vote we had after the referendum?
But a general election is every five years at least. How many referendums will we be having?
Doesn't matter. Each electiop supercedes the previous one, regardless of the length of time between them. That makes the 2017 election more relevant than any before it.
So if there was another referendum and remain won by 51% to 49% what would that tell us and where would we go from there?
-
If there was a referendum tomorrow remain would be 70%.
-
That literally is democracy though...?
Like keep voting until we get the 'right' result? This is 1984.
We got the right result at the 2017 General Election, didn't we? You know, the vote we had after the referendum?
But a general election is every five years at least. How many referendums will we be having?
Doesn't matter. Each electiop supercedes the previous one, regardless of the length of time between them. That makes the 2017 election more relevant than any before it.
So if there was another referendum and remain won by 51% to 49% what would that tell us and where would we go from there?
We would say thats 2 - 1 to Remain - 1975 by a MASSIVE Majority of33% and 2019 by 2% - against 4 % to Leave in 2016 Simples !
-
Or more controversially, if the leave voters won again, where would we be then.
In exactly the same place as we are now?
-
Thing is, next referendum can actually offer a clear view of what a leave vote will mean.. And if that means a bigger leave majority so be it..
-
Thing is, next referendum can actually offer a clear view of what a leave vote will mean.. Andy if that means a bigger leave majority so be it..
But it can't because it is still not clear is it? The failure is on politicians to correctly set that up.
-
Clearer than in 2016 at least..
-
Don't know how many times I have to point this out.
In 2016, we didn't know what Leave meant. Folk might say they did, but the changes of stance by the main Leave spokespeople SINCE that vote proves we didn't. Farage was still talking about a Norway deal Leave six months after the vote. Now he's saying that would be a betrayal.
So, now we know in detail what the Leave options really look like, how can having another vote be called undemocratic.
If ANY specific form of Leave wins that vote, that's the issue finished.
-
Changed my mind on this but remain must beat deal/no deal combined?
-
Auckley.
That's easily accommodated. You have a single transferrable vote as I've posted on here several times.
Easy. Fair. Democratic.
-
If there was a second vote, what can the remain side bring to the table that they have not already used.
The leave side will start their own project fear about remaining now we have lost credibility and influence in Brussels. They will project us as a laughing stock to the rest of Europe, Europe will make us join the euro as punishment and a condition of staying in, we will have to accept a european army air force etc. centralised taxes.
If a quick new referendum is possible then yes I can see a remain vote, the longer the period for the vote to take place the more chance of the same result of an out vote is possible, the argument is all one way at the moment, that would change dramatically before another referendum.
-
You can fight against the system from inside the club..
-
Selby
Keep up.
The EU has said that we can rescind A50 and carry on under our current membership terms. There is no possibility whatsoever of us being strong armed into the Euro, EU army, harmonised taxes or anything of the sort. If there was, then I would be supporting leaving.
It's rubbish like this being peddled that makes a mockery of debate and democratic decisions.
-
If there was a second vote, what can the remain side bring to the table that they have not already used.
The leave side will start their own project fear about remaining now we have lost credibility and influence in Brussels. They will project us as a laughing stock to the rest of Europe, Europe will make us join the euro as punishment and a condition of staying in, we will have to accept a european army air force etc. centralised taxes.
If a quick new referendum is possible then yes I can see a remain vote, the longer the period for the vote to take place the more chance of the same result of an out vote is possible, the argument is all one way at the moment, that would change dramatically before another referendum.
Selby, all those things the pro-europe band have been saying will still stand depending on what (if allowed to vote on in their own country) is proposed and voted for. The more encompassing eg the more we stay the same the better off the majority will be.
Project leave are the ones that have lost all credibility, not the leave voters as we have established they were sold a dummy. The only way Britain will be a laughing stock is if we listen to the likes of Fargo, Bojo, and Magoo and vote to leave.
Europe cannot make us do anything we do not wish to do, but if we wish to be part of the most prosperous dynamic region in the world then we will have to comply with the conditions and agreements as all the other 27 countries do, and take part in formulating those agreements.
'The EU does not have a direct role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax you pay is decided by your government, not the EU.''
https://europa.eu/european-union/topics/taxation_en
The implementation of the CSDP involves the deployment of military or civilian missions for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. Military missions are carried out by EU forces established with contributions from the member states' armed forces. The CSDP also entails collective self-defence amongst member states[d] as well as a Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) in which 25 of the 28 national armed forces pursue structural integration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Security_and_Defence_Policy
-
Just a thought........as this Brexit situation is the most important thing for us in donkeys years, wouldn’t it be good if the best brains from all parties got their heads together and sorted out what is really best for the uk and its people.
They could go back to trying to put each other down and score points off each other once Brexit, or remain, had been sorted out so the best interests of us all had been dealt with.
Now that would show the EU people that we really mean business and we wouldn’t be seen to be a laughing stock.
-
In addition to that Sydney the UK have actually asked to be part of a new European Intervention Initiative as the government fears our security will be weaker after Brexit.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/defence-and-security/news/nine-european-countries-to-formalise-eu-defence-force-plan/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/25/nine-eu-states-to-sign-off-on-joint-military-intervention-force
-
Just a thought........as this Brexit situation is the most important thing for us in donkeys years, wouldn’t it be good if the best brains from all parties got their heads together and sorted out what is really best for the uk and its people.
They could go back to trying to put each other down and score points off each other once Brexit, or remain, had been sorted out so the best interests of us all had been dealt with.
Now that would show the EU people that we really mean business and we wouldn’t be seen to be a laughing stock.
That's fine Hound, but I'm not sure who would be the best brains the Tory party could offer.
The Cabinet has been party to two years of negotiations that led to a deal that no one wants.
The ERG have repeatedly belittled any analysis that independent experts have put out, claimed that there are magic fairy dust solutions to the NI border issues and said that cutting deals with Kenya and Oklahoma will be the way forward after we make it harder for us to do business with half a billion of the richest people on earth on our doorstep.
The basic problem is that both party leaders and their advisers are using the issue as a stick with which to defeat the other side. There ARE sensible heads on both sides (Grieve is one on the Tory side who has consistently talked sense and also tried to raise the issue of Russian interference in the ballot, that both main party leaders refuse to discuss). But they are marginalised figures within their own parties with no power to influence the debate significantly.
We are dreadfully lacking statesmen. We have a generation of 3rd rate political pygmies in charge.
-
In addition to that Sydney the UK have actually asked to be part of a new European Intervention Initiative as the government fears our security will be weaker after Brexit.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/defence-and-security/news/nine-european-countries-to-formalise-eu-defence-force-plan/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/25/nine-eu-states-to-sign-off-on-joint-military-intervention-force
[/quote:
Wilts, the weird thing about brexit that is either not understood or ignored is that we cannot as a nation live in isolation to Europe, most of what the brexit tribe are clamouring against will be re-negotiated with other countries over time therefore nullifying most of what they now want (or don't want) There will be some trade negotiations with countries outside the EU that will favour us but the majority cannot replace what we already have, and nothing will make up for the loss to the economy experienced to this point and to when, if ever Britain regains some sort of balance and trade deals with the rest of the world, that boat has sailed, 10 or more years of a reduced economy.
Having joint forces across Europe make economic sense as well as political sense.
-
Just a thought........as this Brexit situation is the most important thing for us in donkeys years, wouldn’t it be good if the best brains from all parties got their heads together and sorted out what is really best for the uk and its people.
They could go back to trying to put each other down and score points off each other once Brexit, or remain, had been sorted out so the best interests of us all had been dealt with.
Now that would show the EU people that we really mean business and we wouldn’t be seen to be a laughing stock.
That's fine Hound, but I'm not sure who would be the best brains the Tory party could offer.
The Cabinet has been party to two years of negotiations that led to a deal that no one wants.
The ERG have repeatedly belittled any analysis that independent experts have put out, claimed that there are magic fairy dust solutions to the NI border issues and said that cutting deals with Kenya and Oklahoma will be the way forward after we make it harder for us to do business with half a billion of the richest people on earth on our doorstep.
The basic problem is that both party leaders and their advisers are using the issue as a stick with which to defeat the other side. There ARE sensible heads on both sides (Grieve is one on the Tory side who has consistently talked sense and also tried to raise the issue of Russian interference in the ballot, that both main party leaders refuse to discuss). But they are marginalised figures within their own parties with no power to influence the debate significantly.
We are dreadfully lacking statesmen. We have a generation of 3rd rate political pygmies in charge.
As I suggested and you have confirmed, there ARE sensible heads on both sides.
Also, as everyone knows, the Brexit issue is be8ng used as a political tool to beat the other side with.
As poor as our politicians may be the time is right for them to pull together to get things sorted for the benefit of the country.
I keep reading that Brexit is the biggest issue for the UK since WW2.
Wasn’t the war cabinet a mixture of both major parties?
-
Just a thought........as this Brexit situation is the most important thing for us in donkeys years, wouldn’t it be good if the best brains from all parties got their heads together and sorted out what is really best for the uk and its people.
***OXYMORON ALERT*** 'Best brains from all parties'.
-
Hound
Yes. But they are not in positions of power. So they can't substantively influence things.
-
Hound
Yes. But they are not in positions of power. So they can't substantively influence things.
The point should be though, they should work together in the short term for the benefit of us all and for the country, rather than trying to belittle the opposition parties.
They would get much more respect from the general public.
-
Hound.
WHO should?
The leaders on both sides have no vision.
The clear-sighted ones on both sides have no power.
-
Hound.
WHO should?
The leaders on both sides have no vision.
The clear-sighted ones on both sides have no power.
The two parties should.
The clear sighted ones should be drafted in, much like as in a war cabinet.
Our politicians have been elected to do the best they can for their constituents.
If would be good if they did just that instead of trying to put down their opponents.
-
In his Conference speech Corbyn said he was willing to work with the Tories to find an acceptable deal. He, McDonnell and other senior Labour figures have consistently repeated that ever since, both in Parliament and out of it. In fact McDonnell was very vocal about it when he was on Peston last week.
Now you may say that Labour are being very disingenuous about this and only offering to work with May as they know she can't as any deal she passes with the help of Labour votes will drive the right-wing of her party mad and most likely split them, but it's not Labour who are blocking working together.
Yes Hound, one of Churchill's first moves was to appoint Labour ministers to his cabinet. In fact if I remember correctly he actually approached Attlee to see if he would be willing to work with him before he brought down Chamberlain.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
They do.
I have also been advised to stock up on food and other consumables.
Good fun eh.
-
Leave won by 2% and now we're heading for the most hardest of Brexits but Theresa doesn't want to divide the country anymore....
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
-
Leave won by 2% and now we're heading for the most hardest of Brexits but Theresa doesn't want to divide the country anymore....
Leave won by 3.8%
-
Leave won by 2% and now we're heading for the most hardest of Brexits but Theresa doesn't want to divide the country anymore....
Leave won by 3.8%
Slightly out but it's f**king ridiculous.
-
How can she avoid dividing the country?
-
Wrong question BB.
Here's an analogy.
A group of friends have a vote to decide whether to have a holiday in a specific hotel in Benidorm in a specific week in July, or have a holiday in the UK.
Close run thing, but UK wins it. Then one sub-set of those friends insist that "Holiday in the UK" mean going to Cleethorpes. In winter. And then they berate anyone who argues otherwise for not respecting the democratic decision of the group. And when the others enquire whether they can have a vote, specifically on those two defined choices, the sub-set threaten to go and riot.
-
The second referendum and overturn Brexit voters are still in the majority on this poll.
-
You call that an analogy because you believe it compares though, Billy lad. If only all the country agreed with you!
-
The second referendum and overturn Brexit voters are still in the majority on this poll.
Turns out not many cavemen own computers or mobile devices that are internet capable.
-
I wonder if there are others who, like me, haven't voted in this poll?
-
I doubt there's anybody like you BB.
-
Two steps to being unique, Billy;
1, Don't tell people everything
2, ........................................
-
You having a senior moment there BB?
-
Meanwhile.
Here is how the Health Secretary of the sixth most economically powerful nation on earth is spending his time.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/matt-hancock-uk-buy-fridges-stockpile-drugs-brexit-no-deal/
f**k.
Me.
Sideways.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
-
.... great point. Especially as the 18-24 Group voted 70 - 30 to Remain - they have to after all endure what an Exit brings be that good or bad
I also do not believe that anyone of any age could have been brainwashed by the information given that supported either Leave of Remain because largely there were no facts - just hypothesis on either side
-
.... great point. Especially as the 18-24 Group voted 70 - 30 to Remain - they have to after all endure what an Exit brings be that good or bad
I also do not believe that anyone of any age could have been brainwashed by the information given that supported either Leave of Remain because largely there were no facts - just hypothesis on either side
To me, and many others, that just highlights the naivety, and the lack of life experience leading to worldly wisdom, that, that young age group shows.
-
Wasn’t the minimum age for the Scottish independence referendum 16.?
Surely the same reasoning can apply elsewhere.?
-
.... great point. Especially as the 18-24 Group voted 70 - 30 to Remain - they have to after all endure what an Exit brings be that good or bad
I also do not believe that anyone of any age could have been brainwashed by the information given that supported either Leave of Remain because largely there were no facts - just hypothesis on either side
To me, and many others, that just highlights the naivety, and the lack of life experience leading to worldly wisdom, that, that young age group shows.
Mmmmm, maybe the brexiteers will want a second referendum restricted to the age group which best suits their purpose.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
Have they worked and paid taxes for years? Do they have any life experience? No. I have, therefore my opinion is more important than some kid fresh out of school.
Maybe we should be looking at not allowing the vote to non-working people who are below the retirement age
-
Your opinion is no more valid than anyone else’s..
How much more worldly wise is someone at 18 than 16 or 17.??
Democracy is great, but only for those who deserve it, eh.??
-
Your opinion is no more valid than anyone else’s..
How much more worldly wise is someone at 18 than 16 or 17.??
Democracy is great, but only for those who deserve it, eh.??
There has to be a cut off point.
Why not let five year olds vote? Mind you they'd probably talk more sense than half of the chancers in the HOC.
-
Explain to me why it was ok for young adults to vote on the Scottish independence referendum but not in the brexit one.?
Without some smart arse response.??
-
(https://i.imgur.com/nnwVNui.png)
-
In this country there are many things that adults (18+) are deemed mature and responsible enough to do that 16 year olds are not.
Why should voting be any different?
It just seems like a cynical way for certain political groups to try and boost the electorate with more people who they assume would vote the 'right' way.
-
Explain to me why it was ok for young adults to vote on the Scottish independence referendum but not in the brexit one.?
Without some smart arse response.??
No one is saying that they think that is ok ....
-
Explain to me why it was ok for young adults to vote on the Scottish independence referendum but not in the brexit one.?
Without some smart arse response.??
We are not in Scotland.
Brexit is an issue for the whole of Britain. The fact that the Scots have changed their laws regarding the voting age is nothing to do with the whole of Britain.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
........well, only if you are 85 or older.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I think the idea is that their future is equally as important as yours..
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Aye, but they haven't got the intellect, maturity, or life experience to make an informed choice at that age.
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
This.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Tough. The younger generation think they know everything. Let them sort it out after i'm gone along with 'climate change'.
-
So the younger generation has to sort out the mess we leave them.?
Do you get up early in the morning to practice, or does your attitude to others come naturally.?
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Tough. The younger generation think they know everything. Let them sort it out after i'm gone along with 'climate change'.
Ahh Baby Boomers, the generation that had everything handed to them and ruined it for future generations.
-
.... great point. Especially as the 18-24 Group voted 70 - 30 to Remain - they have to after all endure what an Exit brings be that good or bad
I also do not believe that anyone of any age could have been brainwashed by the information given that supported either Leave of Remain because largely there were no facts - just hypothesis on either side
For years I have despaired at the modern education system that doesn't teach young people the grammatical rules of the English language or bother to teach them spelling or the times tables. On that evidence along Wolfie I am ready to concede I judged it harshly. They have the upper hand when it comes to rational thinking and common sense.
-
Just off topic I know but I wonder what the record is for the number of quote on quote on quote etc is ? Must be getting close now to a new record !
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
So your saying the voting age should be around 21 - 75 ish. I'm fine by that.
As for the referendum, the choice was simple, remain or leave . The public chose leave.
If the remain campaign had a problem with that question, they should have raised it at the time.
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
So your saying the voting age should be around 21 - 75 ish. I'm fine by that.
As for the referendum, the choice was simple, remain or leave . The public chose leave.
If the remain campaign had a problem with that question, they should have raised it at the time.
Age doesn't give someone the knowledge to make a intelligent vote. There's people in that age bracket you mention who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Tough. The younger generation think they know everything. Let them sort it out after i'm gone along with 'climate change'.
Ahh Baby Boomers, the generation that had everything handed to them and ruined it for future generations.
g
That is an insult to all people of my age. I left school in 1964 and retired just before my 66th birthday. I had two jobs at times and worked overtime to leave me comfortable in retirement. Me an my family have also cost the state very little over those years.
Don't dare to tar everybody with the same brush.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Tough. The younger generation think they know everything. Let them sort it out after i'm gone along with 'climate change'.
Ahh Baby Boomers, the generation that had everything handed to them and ruined it for future generations.
g
That is an insult to all people of my age. I left school in 1964 and retired just before my 66th birthday. I had two jobs at times and worked overtime to leave me comfortable in retirement. Me an my family have also cost the state very little over those years.
Don't dare to tar everybody with the same brush.
I'm sorry the majority ruin it for the minority x
-
What is an intelligent vote? Do you mean only people who vote the same way as you cast an intelligent vote and those who vote differently to you cast an unintelligent vote?
Perhaps only people who voted remain should be allowed to vote in future?
-
I imagine an intelligent vote is voting on more than the basis of "f**k it we're British it'll be reyt" and "rule Britannia".
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
So your saying the voting age should be around 21 - 75 ish. I'm fine by that.
As for the referendum, the choice was simple, remain or leave . The public chose leave.
If the remain campaign had a problem with that question, they should have raised it at the time.
Age doesn't give someone the knowledge to make a intelligent vote. There's people in that age bracket you mention who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.
No, age gives someone the responsibility to make political decisions by having the right to vote. If you're an adult in this country then that's the responsibility you're given, as you're considered mature enough to have it - along with many other responsibilities that come with being an adult.
Whether that vote is made 'intelligently' is irrelevant, and also completely subjective.
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
What is this crap? I'm saying age doesn't equal the intelligence to vote, so 16 year olds should be given the chance, not to remove anyones rights. It's the pro-Brexit people that seem to believe that age matters over understanding of what you're voting for.
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
Point out to me what part of my post I mentioned taking away anyone's vote? can't see it myself.
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
So your saying the voting age should be around 21 - 75 ish. I'm fine by that.
As for the referendum, the choice was simple, remain or leave . The public chose leave.
If the remain campaign had a problem with that question, they should have raised it at the time.
I never said anything about those age groups. Can’t see why you concluded that..
And yes, the choice was clear, but the meaning of the choice, ie the informed part, certainly wasn’t - regardless of the politicking on both sides..
-
You could argue that many of the people who are of age to vote don’t have the intellect and maturity to make an informed choice.!
Not only that, the brexit referendum wasn’t an informed choice in the first place.!!
Thanks for helping me illustrate that point..
So your saying the voting age should be around 21 - 75 ish. I'm fine by that.
As for the referendum, the choice was simple, remain or leave . The public chose leave.
If the remain campaign had a problem with that question, they should have raised it at the time.
I never said anything about those age groups. Can’t see why you concluded that..
And yes, the choice was clear, but the meaning of the choice, ie the informed part, certainly wasn’t - regardless of the politicking on both sides..
I think that 16yo's would make a better fist of it than the government that got us into and sustained this mess.
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
What is this crap? I'm saying age doesn't equal the intelligence to vote, so 16 year olds should be given the chance, not to remove anyones rights. It's the pro-Brexit people that seem to believe that age matters over understanding of what you're voting for.
You also said....
Age doesn't give someone the knowledge to make a intelligent vote. There's people in that age bracket you mention who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
Point out to me what part of my post I mentioned taking away anyone's vote? can't see it myself.
So you disagree with DonnyOsmond then yet question MY post? Why not question his?
-
The biggest insult has been to the older generation was when they were young, they were denied a vote on the Maastricht Treaty. if they had had that vote, all this b******s may have been avoided, and the Common Market could still have been what we are members of, and not the effort it has morphed into.
Not having that vote, and having the wool pulled over their eyes, and seeing industries moved to other member countries with cheaper labour, in my opinion was much more reason with the older generation to vote out than any silly numbers on the side of a bus, give us a little more credit than that, and they had to watch, while the rich got richer,and their good well paid jobs got scarcer.
And the warnings of much more credible politicians such as Tony Benn, than this set of no hopers were remembered, and had come true, so maybe, just maybe, you younguns, they may have had more idea of what may be your future than you think.
-
Aye Selby.
Cos Maastricht has led us into penury and servitude hasn't it?
For f**ks sake.
We got all the benefits and none of the problems from Maastricht. And still folk f**king whine about it.
-
Ah, so in future, we take away the vote from people who you imagine vote on the wrong basis, the wrong basis being that you don't agree with them?
Point out to me what part of my post I mentioned taking away anyone's vote? can't see it myself.
So you disagree with DonnyOsmond then yet question MY post? Why not question his?
I answered your question, you responded and I responded in kind. Tends to be how things work.
-
How things work is if you answer someone else's question for them it suggests that you agree with their point. If you then point out that you don't agree with them, it is in my view a sign that you should have questioned their post, not mine.
-
I've said before that my point is age doesn't equal knowledge and wisdom to make a smart vote and there's 16 year olds in a better position than 65 year olds. My obvious point was there is people in the current voting age and in Boomsticks mentioned range who don't have the smarts to make a knowledgeable choice without their prejudices, "fake news", etc clouding their judgement. We live in a democracy where people in the voting age get to make their own choice and that's fine with me, even if it's not the same choice as mine. I'm talking about the people who think we'll go back to the days of the empire, the people that think Merkel is going to turn into Hitler and send us all to war, the people that think Corbyn's a terrorist because the Daily Mail says so, the people that think Brexit meant kicking out Muslims from Britain (I know a person who thought this), etc.
-
I've said before that my point is age doesn't equal knowledge and wisdom to make a smart vote and there's 16 year olds in a better position than 65 year olds. My obvious point was there is people in the current voting age and in Boomsticks mentioned range who don't have the smarts to make a knowledgeable choice without their prejudices, "fake news", etc clouding their judgement. We live in a democracy where people in the voting age get to make their own choice and that's fine with me, even if it's not the same choice as mine. I'm talking about the people who think we'll go back to the days of the empire, the people that think Merkel is going to turn into Hitler and send us all to war, the people that think Corbyn's a terrorist because the Daily Mail says so, the people that think Brexit meant kicking out Muslims from Britain (I know a person who thought this), etc.
I think you are naive if you think those people exist - they largely do not. They don't have these thoughts because of any papers etc but because of who they actually are. There's also young people and plenty of them with these views.
The reality is that the cycle probably hasn't changed in terms of age that much (though I haven't researched it). You inevitably have a much different view on the world when younger then older as for quite a few, things change in terms of lifestyle, finance, social groups, employment etc.....
All that being said, I'd probably agree that 16 is a fair age for voting. 16 year olds on the whole do have enough knowledge to make the decision, they just have a different outlook given that point in their life.
-
I've said before that my point is age doesn't equal knowledge and wisdom to make a smart vote and there's 16 year olds in a better position than 65 year olds. My obvious point was there is people in the current voting age and in Boomsticks mentioned range who don't have the smarts to make a knowledgeable choice without their prejudices, "fake news", etc clouding their judgement. We live in a democracy where people in the voting age get to make their own choice and that's fine with me, even if it's not the same choice as mine. I'm talking about the people who think we'll go back to the days of the empire, the people that think Merkel is going to turn into Hitler and send us all to war, the people that think Corbyn's a terrorist because the Daily Mail says so, the people that think Brexit meant kicking out Muslims from Britain (I know a person who thought this), etc.
I think you are naive if you think those people exist - they largely do not. They don't have these thoughts because of any papers etc but because of who they actually are. There's also young people and plenty of them with these views.
The reality is that the cycle probably hasn't changed in terms of age that much (though I haven't researched it). You inevitably have a much different view on the world when younger then older as for quite a few, things change in terms of lifestyle, finance, social groups, employment etc.....
All that being said, I'd probably agree that 16 is a fair age for voting. 16 year olds on the whole do have enough knowledge to make the decision, they just have a different outlook given that point in their life.
You call me naive then agree with me that they do exist. I've not said it's just older people who have those opinions either.
-
Sorry I should clarify, it's not because of the daily mail, which is actually seeing a big change in editorial viewpoints anyway right now. The media is not that powerful.
-
3500 army personell placed on standby for a no deal brexit, do they think things ate going to turn violent?
People most likely to riot? Young people.
People most ignored and voted heavily to remain? Young people.
People's Vote with 3 options of No Deal, Remain or May's Deal. That will then calm things instead of May taking us towards no deal with her fingers in her ears. Allow 16 year olds to vote too as it will affect them more than someone who is 61.
16 year olds who know nothing other than what they have been brainwashed by the left wing teaching mafia.
Some 16 year olds know more than some 60 year olds.
What the dead ones?
Most of the youth I come across are only interested in I-phones and video games. They're not old enough to vote and that is the law. You only want to change it because you hope in this case it suits your requirements.
Read my post from earlier. I want this because it affects a 16 year old more than an 85 year old. Why do they get no say in their futures?
So you're saying that the future of 16 year olds is more important than mine, despite decades of myself being a taxpayer?
I'm saying there future is a hell of a lot longer so it'll affect them more than you.
Tough. The younger generation think they know everything. Let them sort it out after i'm gone along with 'climate change'.
Ahh Baby Boomers, the generation that had everything handed to them and ruined it for future generations.
I'm 52. Not a boomer I think.
-
As with the WHOLE B****t question from start to finish this particular question of age is divisive.
Gender would be too along with I.Q. and even whether you support Man U or Man City. There are a million questions just as devisive and I for one reckon we should just move on !
The Politicians cannot (yet) resolve the ACTUAL serious question and sure as hell neither can we NOR any / all of the sub questions that arise. People have their own opinions on everything and I for one respect their views AND their right to hold those views
-
It looks like potentially bad news for U.K. nationals living in the EU. From what I’ve heard, the EU’s preparation for a no deal will create a huge amount of uncertainty for UK nationals living in the EU
-
Eee.
Them f**king evil,devious EU bas**rds eh?
-
And what about the EU citizens in the UK?
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
Yes - especially those in my immediate family!
OK I expect 2 of them would probably be good to stay due to being resident here for over 20 years, but one has only been here 2 years..
Funnily enough that was my main reason to vote remain.. might have voted leave if their status was clear at the referendum..
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
This country is what it is because of the migration of people from elsewhere over many centuries..
Britain for the Celts only then.?!
My other half moved over as a British forces wife, now divorced.. I’m sure she isn’t the only EU citizen in that situation..
-
don't forget it is all part of a bigger picture.
When Vladimir Putin thinks you're destroying democracy, you must be doing something right.
#PeoplesVote
-
don't forget it is all part of a bigger picture.
When Vladimir Putin thinks you're destroying democracy, you must be doing something right.
#PeoplesVote
I like Putin. He would have sorted the EU if he was PM.
Also he kicked arse in Syria!
-
The EU doesn't need 'sorting' , the UK is being very silly and making a complete fool of itself in front of the world . other countries are absolutely p1ssing themselves at what 'we' are doing ,.When this farce is stopped ,
it will take years to regain any respect. It's the UK that needs 'sorting'.
Also don't really care for totalitarian dictators myself , though PM May is trying her best to act like one.
-
The EU doesn't need 'sorting' , the UK is being very silly and making a complete fool of itself in front of the world . other countries are absolutely p1ssing themselves at what 'we' are doing ,.When this farce is stopped ,
it will take years to regain any respect. It's the UK that needs 'sorting'.
Also don't really care for totalitarian dictators myself , though PM May is trying her best to act like one.
Who is being silly? There's nothing wrong with wanting to be an independent nation. The common market which we joined was a trading bloc, it has/is morphing into a United States of Europe which as far I am aware no-one has voted for.
-
I dont remember voting for the Ryder Cup to include European players either! When are they gonna change that?
Nowadays we compete and beat the Americans all the time it was much better when we got hammered every other year lets go back to that but without Ireland........ and some other team decides if Rory is allowed to play.
-
in what way do you need to be more 'independent' than you are now ?
There's no going back to the British Empire.
Our Future, Our Choice Retweeted
Femi @Femi_Sorry · Dec 19
Femi Retweeted Our Future, Our Choice
People and Politicians are gradually realising that a People's Vote is the only way out of this mess. So if you want to make sure the people leading the debate aren't the same tired voices you heard in 2016, please help us!
-
in what way do you need to be more 'independent' than you are now ?
There's no going back to the British Empire.
Our Future, Our Choice Retweeted
Femi @Femi_Sorry · Dec 19
Femi Retweeted Our Future, Our Choice
People and Politicians are gradually realising that a People's Vote is the only way out of this mess. So if you want to make sure the people leading the debate aren't the same tired voices you heard in 2016, please help us!
I don't want to go back to the British Empire. I just want us to be left alone and for us to stop interfering in the business of other countries and making ourselves a target for terror.
-
the UK .? which has interfered with 'other countries' more than anyone else in world history.
Leaving the EU would not effect the 'target for terror 'status , but it will damage the economy and Doncaster is one of the places that will take most of the hit (as usual ).
it will allow a few rich people , ( Brexit funders ) who like to keep the their money offshore and not pay a penny in tax to avoid the EU clamp down on this activity.
And of course Putin ( Brexit funder - via Aaron Banks ) , would find it easier to expand his empire if the EU is weaker. same with Trump.
Spending their money pumping out simplistic sh1te about independence certainly has been effective .
But remember in 2019 , no one can leave the modern world.
-
the UK .? which has interfered with 'other countries' more than anyone else in world history.
Leaving the EU would not effect the 'target for terror 'status , but it will damage the economy and Doncaster is one of the places that will take most of the hit (as usual ).
it will allow a few rich people , ( Brexit funders ) who like to keep the their money offshore and not pay a penny in tax to avoid the EU clamp down on this activity.
And of course Putin ( Brexit funder - via Aaron Banks ) , would find it easier to expand his empire if the EU is weaker. same with Trump.
Spending their money pumping out simplistic sh1te about independence certainly has been effective .
But remember in 2019 , no one can leave the modern world.
If Putin wants to expand in the east who are we to interfere? I certainly do not want to risk British lives fighting for people we know nothing of, against the Russians who were our greatest ally in WW2.
Yes, we had an empire in the past, so did many nations who could, be we have moved on and should not get involved.
-
Neville Chamberlain held that view in 1938 , but not highly thought of these days. A stronger EU is in a much better position to stand up to Putin
and avoid any conflict.
-
the UK .? which has interfered with 'other countries' more than anyone else in world history.
Leaving the EU would not effect the 'target for terror 'status , but it will damage the economy and Doncaster is one of the places that will take most of the hit (as usual ).
it will allow a few rich people , ( Brexit funders ) who like to keep the their money offshore and not pay a penny in tax to avoid the EU clamp down on this activity.
And of course Putin ( Brexit funder - via Aaron Banks ) , would find it easier to expand his empire if the EU is weaker. same with Trump.
Spending their money pumping out simplistic sh1te about independence certainly has been effective .
But remember in 2019 , no one can leave the modern world.
If Putin wants to expand in the east who are we to interfere? I certainly do not want to risk British lives fighting for people we know nothing of, against the Russians who were our greatest ally in WW2.
Yes, we had an empire in the past, so did many nations who could, be we have moved on and should not get involved.
So the alliances we had during the Cold War, where the nature of the Soviet Bloc was perceived as a big threat to the West, were pointless.??
-
the UK .? which has interfered with 'other countries' more than anyone else in world history.
Leaving the EU would not effect the 'target for terror 'status , but it will damage the economy and Doncaster is one of the places that will take most of the hit (as usual ).
it will allow a few rich people , ( Brexit funders ) who like to keep the their money offshore and not pay a penny in tax to avoid the EU clamp down on this activity.
And of course Putin ( Brexit funder - via Aaron Banks ) , would find it easier to expand his empire if the EU is weaker. same with Trump.
Spending their money pumping out simplistic sh1te about independence certainly has been effective .
But remember in 2019 , no one can leave the modern world.
If Putin wants to expand in the east who are we to interfere? I certainly do not want to risk British lives fighting for people we know nothing of, against the Russians who were our greatest ally in WW2.
Yes, we had an empire in the past, so did many nations who could, be we have moved on and should not get involved.
I've had a tough year this year, so I'm not fully on the ball. Someone confirm for me please. It IS 2017 isn't it? Not 1937?
EDIT. Or even 2018. Told you it's been a tough year...
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Does Milwall have any non UK Nationals playing for them and would you want to send them "home" as well.
-
Billy, a little late I know, but I am not as interested in this subject as you, and I admire your enthusiasm and energy you put into your cause. But I don't use bad language in my replies to you, please don't to do it to me.
-
Selby.
Aye alright. Although you may wish to review the post of yours I replied to before you get too moralistic.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg822548#msg822548
-
Really good comment piece here on the prospect of a second referendum and what the Labour approach to it may be. Not only because it begins to address a point that I have previously made, the outcome for remain in a second referendum can't be a return to pre-June 2016 but needs to demonstrate to people how by voting that way their lives will improve.
'That carelessness runs through many of today’s arguments for holding a second referendum. When some well-lunched eminence chunters on about Brexit being an act of “monumental self-harm”, do they ever think how that sounds to someone who’s been harmed year after year by waiting months for an operation, by a care service that’s falling to bits, by the lack of police to follow up local muggings? The same goes for those homilies about how “no one voted to make themselves poorer”. Well, no one voted for their factories to shut and the council to bend over backwards to bring in some distribution warehouse with a bunch of minimum wage jobs, but that’s what they got.'
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/20/national-emergency-brexit-vote-westminster
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Does Milwall have any non UK Nationals playing for them and would you want to send them "home" as well.
Skalak is Czech, i'll buy his ticket for what he's done so far. If all the foreign players in the Championship left we would be in a far better position than virtually all the rest. Look at the likes of Norwich.
-
Face
Palm
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Does Milwall have any non UK Nationals playing for them and would you want to send them "home" as well.
Skalak is Czech, i'll buy his ticket for what he's done so far. If all the foreign players in the Championship left we would be in a far better position than virtually all the rest. Look at the likes of Norwich.
Look at Norwich, playing some of the best football played in the championship in modern times.
-
it's a lot bigger issue than football and 'foreign' players
I don't care if you're a Trump or Brexit supporter. You have to admit that both Trump and Brexit set one half of each country against the other, reducing the governments' ability to act. WE ARE WEAKER! Vladimir Putin is laughing at us. And he's not even hiding it anymore.
1. Tony RobinsonVerified account @Tony_Robinson 24m24 minutes ago
More
Putin says we shouldn’t hold a second referendum. What better argument in favour of one could there possibly be
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Does Milwall have any non UK Nationals playing for them and would you want to send them "home" as well.
Skalak is Czech, i'll buy his ticket for what he's done so far. If all the foreign players in the Championship left we would be in a far better position than virtually all the rest. Look at the likes of Norwich.
Look at Norwich, playing some of the best football played in the championship in modern times.
They could end up in the PL which is not what we want. Joining that would ruin our club forever. We are a working class club and proud to be rough around the edges. Staying in the Championship and upsetting the big time charlies is what we are all about. PL, no thanks.
-
To the shock of no one on here... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/21/jeremy-corbyn-labour-policy-leaving-eu
-
As I've said. I do sometimes wonder if he's a plant with a mission to destroy the Labour party.
I mean. In the light of THIS poll from last week, how can he possibly come out with the f**king stupid stance he has taken in that interview.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5v5qj2t7c8/PVResults_181214_Brexit_w.pdf
Just look at the poll figures for Lab support if they were to go into a GE supporting Brexit.
22%
22 per-f**king-cent.
And a week later, he says Labour would go into a GE pledged to deliver Brexit.
-
I'm not sure how useful that sort of polling on hypothetical policies actually is. Not least because there isn't even going to be a General Election before we leave the EU.
What it does seem to indicate is that Labour's current position has them better off than if it took one side or the other. So don't take one.
If the main aim is to win a General Election at some point after Brexit, then it seems like a sensible stance to me (even if I disagree with it) - not being seen as 'betraying' Leave voters at this point when you don't have to.
-
No.
The point is to avoid Brexit and THEN win a GE.
Winning a GE at the cost of endorsing or facilitating Brexit is pointless, because there is nothing a Corbyn Govt could do to make up for the economic hit that Brexit will inflict on the working class.
-
That might be what you want.
However Corbyn's job is to get the Labour Party into government at the next available opportunity. Not to sacrifice himself trying and (probably failing to) keep us in the EU with a Tory govt.
Forgive him for having different priorities.
Support for Brexit amongst the working class was, and still is the majority view. Politics should be a two-way street. For a change, the Labour Party probably ought to listen and trust the people it claims to represent, rather than seeing them as a bunch of idiots who require saving from themselves, as it seems to do in this day and age.
That's what stopping Brexit 'on behalf' of the working class amounts to. Utterly pointless if it severely and irreparably undermines trust in democracy and the ability to change things with the vote.
-
Look at those poll figures. If Labour is complicit in facilitating Brexit, it is finished as an electoral force.
-
Look at those poll figures. If Labour is complicit in facilitating Brexit, it is finished as an electoral force.
i repeat, if May can't deliver something reasonable to all the factions in her party which she can't
she will go, there will be a collapse in government stocks and a GE and if Corbyn doesn't support a third vote he will be replaced.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
-
No. It's b*llocks.
Ask my great grandparents who moved from Ireland to Denaby to work in the pits because there was no work in Ireland.
Or my father-in-law who moved from Italy to London in the 1970s because there were no jobs for him at home as a research chemist.
Or the Auf Wiedersehn Pet generation who found work in Germany when our economy collapsed.
Or the ex-employee of mine that we had to release because of a downturn in work, who's just got a job in San Francisco.
You reckon that lot would have been happier staying in their own countries?
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
There's be no NHS to speak of, but I'm sure at least you'd be happy even if no-one else was.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
Of course it's true. It's similar to bellends supporting teams from other cities that they have no connection to.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
If everybody had stayed where they were born - you would be black African.
-
Africa would also be really crowded.
-
seeing as though it's xmas eve, here's a few pro-brexit posts from my local facebook page (who voted 66% for Brexit). They are in reply to a tweet by local MP Anna Turley, who tweeted:
I completely understand why people voted how they did. However the world‘s changed since 2016 & the reality of Brexit is v different to what was sold. Theyre owed the courtesy of confirming or not whether they want to proceed particularly when it will cost jobs & hit them hardest
Seems reasonable? Here's some responses on facebook:
"she,s a f**king idiot abbotts white twin"
"We voted it was a democratic vote? We voted her in in a democratic vote oh god i wish i could cbange my mind on my second vote the southern s***e"
"Again, if she says it's going to affect our area hardest, explain how, because I'm not seeing any actual facts. Just speculation."
"we should have voted Tory"
"don.t listen to the propaganda"
"What a crock of utter shite !! A democratic vote has been done and that’s that . Dry your eyes you whingeing shit bags ."
"If you’re stupid enough to listen to all the scaremongering about leaving your probably prone to sending your money to a nice Nigerian man called Simon who contacted you via email to let you know your about to become very rich ."
"Don’t listen and believe the lies , investigate and research for yourself , Europe is terrified"
"Anna Turley doesn't know what democracy is"
"I do wish these people who we voted in stand by what we voted for and that means OUT I WILL NEVER EVER EVER VOTE LIEBOUR AGAIN !!!"
That last one made me chuckly - they probably think "re-moaner" is the funniest one liner too
-
There will be uproar if we have a second vote and it comes up Remain but the last Poll (of all Polls) I saw was :
56% Remain
44% Leave
Mrs Wolfie says we should have a Vote to see whether we want a Second Vote !
Quote from above
"What a crock of utter shite !! A democratic vote has been done and that’s that . Dry your eyes you whingeing shit bags ."
Not for the hundredth time I return to 1975 when roughly 8 times more of a Majority voted Remain* and the Politicians mainly from the same Party (but not exclusively) started immediately "whingeing" and trying to get their way despite the fact that - from above - " A Democratic vote had been done and thats that"
I realise 1975 was long before many current voters were born AND yes times have changed and I respect that but what I offer up is simply the same principle. It suits those above now but cant they see that whatever the issues then it has to be the same principle - they cant have it both ways ! Are they out now trying to prevent a Second Referendum on Scottish Independence for example as the Majority there said (in a once in a generation Referndum) Stay as we are . I doubt it
* 1975
Remain 66% Leave 34% Majority 32%
2016
Leave 52% Remain 48% Majority 4%
Interesting that 17.4 million voted Leave in 2016 and 17.2 Million voted Remain in 1975 though the numbers to Leave in 75 were only about 8 million and the Remain in 16 were almost twice as high
Interesting that (all figures approx)
-
seeing as though it's xmas eve, here's a few pro-brexit posts from my local facebook page (who voted 66% for Brexit). They are in reply to a tweet by local MP Anna Turley, who tweeted:
I completely understand why people voted how they did. However the world‘s changed since 2016 & the reality of Brexit is v different to what was sold. Theyre owed the courtesy of confirming or not whether they want to proceed particularly when it will cost jobs & hit them hardest
Seems reasonable? Here's some responses on facebook:
"she,s a f**king idiot abbotts white twin"
"We voted it was a democratic vote? We voted her in in a democratic vote oh god i wish i could cbange my mind on my second vote the southern s***e"
"Again, if she says it's going to affect our area hardest, explain how, because I'm not seeing any actual facts. Just speculation."
"we should have voted Tory"
"don.t listen to the propaganda"
"What a crock of utter shite !! A democratic vote has been done and that’s that . Dry your eyes you whingeing shit bags ."
"If you’re stupid enough to listen to all the scaremongering about leaving your probably prone to sending your money to a nice Nigerian man called Simon who contacted you via email to let you know your about to become very rich ."
"Don’t listen and believe the lies , investigate and research for yourself , Europe is terrified"
"Anna Turley doesn't know what democracy is"
"I do wish these people who we voted in stand by what we voted for and that means OUT I WILL NEVER EVER EVER VOTE LIEBOUR AGAIN !!!"
That last one made me chuckly - they probably think "re-moaner" is the funniest one liner too
Whereabouts in Redcar are you?
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
If everybody had stayed where they were born - you would be black African.
What a load of old b*llocks.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
If everybody had stayed where they were born - you would be black African.
What a load of old b*llocks.
Of course it is, that's where homo sapiens came from. You'd still be in the Neander Valley.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
If everybody had stayed where they were born - you would be black African.
What a load of old b*llocks.
Of course it is, that's where homo sapiens came from. You'd still be in the Neander Valley.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/
Do try and keep up old boy.
-
IDM
You mean the ones whose status May refused to confirm for the first half of the Brexit negotiations? The ones she implied might be turfed out in March 2019? The ones who had 18 months of not being able to plan their futures? The ones she was using as a bargaining chip in an attempt to force the EU into other concessions?
I can't for the life of me understand why people see the need to go and live in other country. If everyone stayed at home there wouldn't be any problems and we'd all be happy.
Face
Palm
True though aint it?
If everybody had stayed where they were born - you would be black African.
What a load of old b*llocks.
Of course it is, that's where homo sapiens came from. You'd still be in the Neander Valley.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/
Do try and keep up old boy.
If you actually read the article and not just the headline, you'll notice it's talking about an ancestor of man, not Homo Sapiens itself. Homo Sapiens appeared about 300,00 years ago, not 7+ million years ago. It's more likely to be the ancestor of Neanderthal Man. Do try and keep up old boy.
-
Nothing wrong with Neanderthal man. He got screwed over by the foreigners.
-
Nothing wrong with Neanderthal man. He got screwed over by the foreigners.
Why, what did they do to you?
-
In that particular case, the "foreigners" were more intelligent, better organised and more ruthlessly competitive. Not sure what AL's point is.
-
In that particular case, the "foreigners" were more intelligent, better organised and more ruthlessly competitive. Not sure what AL's point is.
Winding people up.
-
Ah.
Then that's doubly sad.
1) Being a wind up merchant.
2) Not being very good at it.
-
Ah.
Then that's doubly sad.
1) Being a wind up merchant.
2) Not being very good at it.
I don't know I think I can push a few of the right buttons on here most of the time.
All the same have a happy new year. :)
-
The right buttons or the left knobs? ;)
-
The right buttons or the left knobs? ;)
There's a huge knob in the middle that can just about get sanctimonious prick on it.
Did you somehow manage to overlook that one?
-
It appears that you didn't. Have you been stalking me in the shower now?
-
Government now putting aside £102m to help the flow of goods through Dover in the event of no deal.
This gets dafter by the minute.
-
Government now putting aside £102m to help the flow of goods through Dover in the event of no deal.
This gets dafter by the minute.
Didn't put that on the side of a bus, did they? :silly:
-
Still there's a positive benefit for some tho. The more the economy crashes, the more businesses go bust and the more people that loose their jobs - the more money this billionaire Brexiteer hedge fund manager will make. Every cloud has a silver lining and all that...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/28/crispin-odey-hedge-fund-bets-against-uk-economy-brexit-profit-falls
-
Just think what that money could be spent on... it's sickening.
-
It gets worse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46714984
What an utter clusterf**k.
-
Quite the opposite Billy, I think it sums up May's approach to Brexit perfectly.
A government with no clue has given a multi-million contract to run an emergency ferry service to a shipping company with no ships. What could possibly go wrong....
-
Up brexit creek without a boat.
-
It gets worse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46714984
What an utter clusterf**k.
What's the odds that Seaborne just happen to have made a hefty 'donation' to the Conservative Party?
-
... HA yes - almost certainly made a donation or "worse" (if that is possible) will turn out to be owned by a load of Tory Mandarins.
Grinning Greasy Grayling* sneaked out the news late on Christmas Eve apparantly
This one smells - and the worst thing is they dont seem to care how much they "offend" the Electorate
* He ought to change his name as a sign of respect to one of the most majestic Fish swimming in the UK. Grayling are known as "The Lady of the Stream" but what epithet would you give the walking talking Grayling ?
-
The sale of Caviar has declined in Scotland for similar reasons.
-
Quite the opposite Billy, I think it sums up May's approach to Brexit perfectly.
A government with no clue has given a multi-million contract to run an emergency ferry service to a shipping company with no ships. What could possibly go wrong....
They’re playing it safe, no ships mean no sinking 😂
-
''UK needs to get its act together before Brexit vote, Juncker says''
“I find it entirely unreasonable for parts of the British public to believe that it is for the EU alone to propose a solution for all future British problems,” Juncker said in a wide-ranging interview with the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. “My appeal is this. Get your act together and then tell us what it is you want. Our proposed solutions have been on the table for months.”
Maybe the government needs another 2 years?
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
It sounds like he's suggesting we don't know what we're doing BST, not sure where he'd get that from.
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
You're quite right Billy he is a no body, has had a career in Politics in a country smaller than Sheffield The Twit had no right to speak for Germany, France Italy et al a total nobody.
Bit like Jarred O'Mara telling us what to do!
-
Beyond parody.
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
You're quite right Billy he is a no body, has had a career in Politics in a country smaller than Sheffield The Twit had no right to speak for Germany, France Italy et al a total nobody.
Bit like Jarred O'Mara telling us what to do!
Or Arlene Foster telling May what to do.
-
At least Foster is British not some jumped up little quisling from no hope spots like Luxembourg,Estonia and Poland!
-
But they don't "tell us what to do"... you do realise we also have representatives in the same bodies as these "quislings from no hope spots"?
-
You might not have noticed but the two big players Germany and France are both on their Arses closely folded by Italy,all the rest are little fish like Denmark, Austria,Montenegro!!!
-
But they don't "tell us what to do"... you do realise we also have representatives in the same bodies as these "quislings from no hope spots"?
[/quot
"Oh Yes They will!" (Panto pun)
-
"Oh no they won't " thank god we will soon be rid of em!
-
Come on Sproty. Get it all out.
It's like vomiting after you've eaten something nasty. Very unpleasant to watch but you know the person has to do it if they're going to be able to start functioning like a human being again.
-
You might not have noticed but the two big players Germany and France are both on their Arses closely folded by Italy,all the rest are little fish like Denmark, Austria,Montenegro!!!
When did Montenegro join the EU then?
-
You might not have noticed but the two big players Germany and France are both on their Arses closely folded by Italy,all the rest are little fish like Denmark, Austria,Montenegro!!!
When did Montenegro join the EU then?
Ha ha
-
It gets worse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46714984
What an utter clusterf**k.
Has there been a clearer case of corruption at the top level in recent history?
"Tory Donor gets awarded multi-million pound contract, which he will receive a % of even if Brexit doesn't happen, and his company has never even owned a ship!"
-
Top quality website, Seaborne Freight has.
https://seabornefreight.com
And their Twitter feed is full of useful info.
https://mobile.twitter.com/seabornefreight
f**k me. We ARE a banana republic now. But at least they'll be bendy bananas after Brexit, eh Leavers?
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
Quite simple that one Billy; he's p*ssed up half the time.
-
How DARE Juncker talk to us Brits like that?
You're quite right Billy he is a no body, has had a career in Politics in a country smaller than Sheffield The Twit had no right to speak for Germany, France Italy et al a total nobody.
Bit like Jarred O'Mara telling us what to do!
Yes, he had a career in a small country, but you seem to live in the past.
He HAS a career in politics in an organisation where he represents the governments of 27 countries. I think that trumps us if it just boils down to the size of where you represent.
-
You might not have noticed but the two big players Germany and France are both on their Arses closely folded by Italy,all the rest are little fish like Denmark, Austria,Montenegro!!!
So what are you saying here Sproty, that you're not allowed to be elected to high positions within Euro-organisations unless you were born in a large wealthy country, you could extrapolate this theory and suggest that you're not allowed to be elected to the British parliament unless you were born in a big city???
The argument is a red herring anyway as what Juncker is saying here is don't look to Europe to sort out the mess, get on with it, sort it out May-as if. Two years of running in reverse.
-
It's pretty simple really, and was all entirely predictable.
Everyone of the more intellectual arguments that used to be made to support Brexit have evaporated over the past 2 years.
We're not going to be better off.
We're not going to have the rest of the world running up to us to offer us wonderful deals.
We're not going to be politically stronger.
All that's left now is a rather unpleasant echo of out of date obsessions with us being better than the dirty, cheating, feckless, idle foreigners over the Channel. There are no grander arguments than that left to underpin Brexit.
And still most Brexit folk won't consider changing their minds. Makes you wonder...
-
''All that's left now is a rather unpleasant echo of out of date obsessions with us being better than the dirty, cheating, feckless, idle foreigners over the Channel.''
I was talking to a bloke a week or so back that I have met a couple of times, pleasant, congenial, who travels between countries buying and selling. Brexiter, with absolutely no logic to his argument other than that we should run our own race and we don't want Europe telling us what do, we'll be better off out, other than falsely claiming that the European trawlers are stealing our fish.
I'm thinking what you said above BST.
-
''Don’t expect Brexit to give us a British Alexander Hamilton''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/brexit-british-alexander-hamilton-revolutionaries
PS if you're mistakenly pissed off over thinking we are being badly treated
by the EU, you ain't seen nothing yet if we do leave.
-
''Don’t expect Brexit to give us a British Alexander Hamilton''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/brexit-british-alexander-hamilton-revolutionaries
PS if you're mistakenly pissed off over thinking we are being badly treated
by the EU, you ain't seen nothing yet if we do leave.
What a load of twaddle
-
Why does everybody assume that all that voted for Brexit were or racists bigots etc. or haven't changed their mind?
The aftermath has surely changed the situation drastically.
I voted leave as I didn't want to be part of a more federal Europe. The lack of anybody on the leave side to show any competence to discuss never mind agree any sort of credible deal was more than enough to change my mind.
-
That comment I made above about how the entire intellectual construct of the Leave argument has collapsed.
Little f**king wonder is it, when you had bell-ends like Douglas Carswell providing the philosophical underpinning for the Leave side.
Here he is telling a professor of physics that he's wrong on something that's been established since the days of Isaac f**king Newton.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-tides-ukip-experts-science-mp-a7318461.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
-
That comment I made above about how the entire intellectual construct of the Leave argument has collapsed.
Little f**king wonder is it, when you had bell-ends like Douglas Carswell providing the philosophical underpinning for the Leave side.
Here he is telling a professor of physics that he's wrong on something that's been established since the days of Isaac f**king Newton.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-tides-ukip-experts-science-mp-a7318461.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Perhaps he could explain why tide times are different everday, if they ate caused by the sun, surely they would be at the same time everday if the Sun created the tides
-
Idler.
You are in a very small minority who is prepared to change their minds when the context of the discussion changes. You are very much to be applauded for that. That is how democracy is supposed to work.
What bewilders we is the 15 million or so of our fellow citizens who, according to opinions polls, think we will be better off or no worse off after Brexit. I can't believe they haven't seen the arguments of the past two years. How even the most ardent Leavers now admit there would be economic problems over many years. But folk just don't want to hear that. I wonder what it is that makes them so determined to ignore rational debate?
-
BST,
"I wonder what it is that makes them so determined to ignore rational debate?"
The point is that many people do not engage with rational debate in the way assumed.
The success of Leave campaign (and Trump) was in telling their supporters it is OK to disregard evidence in favour of belief.
You then have a political argument based on the assertion of will versus reason. Religions (of all types) have long understood this.
The strongest bond is loyalty to a cause because it is central to your identity. It has to be defended against all challenges.
A bit like supporting a football team, through thin and thinner. Unless you are one of those chasing success, so you ditch your local side and jump on the bandwagon of whoever is in ascendance at the time.
Do you wanna be in ma gang, ma gang, ma gang.......probably not!
-
Albie
So what are you suggesting?
That we give up rational debate and have a policy of pushing OUR version of reality more effectively than they push THEIR version?
-
This business of Grayling paying ferry companies to expand capacity at ports if we stumble into the No Deal Apocalypse.
So he's given £14m to a British company that had a turnover of £35,000 and has never either owned, rented or operated a boat, to provide services from Ramsgate harbour, which is currently incapable of receiving large ferries because it needs dredging.
Turns out that's the least excruciatingly embarrassing aspect.
He's also given £100m to two real ferry companies.
Brittany Ferries. Which is French
DFDS. Which is Danish.
The terms of the contract are that they will get paid even if they never have to operate a single extra boat, because we avoid a No Deal scenario.
And we WILL avoid No Deal. Because there is an overwhelming majority in Parliament against that scenario.
So, effectively, your Transport Secretary, the strongly pro-Leave Chris Grayling, has just given away to foreign companies, a sum of money that would pay the salaries of 3000 nurses for a year, as an insurance policy against a scenario that will never happen.
Tell you what. This Brexit lark is really showing them foreigners whose in charge, int it?
-
Never mind that. That bas**rd Khan dared to use blue and yellow light bulbs in the NYE fireworks display. That's the real scandal!
-
MM.
I'm confused by the response of folk like Andrew Bridgen and Roger Helmer to those fireworks. I thought it was the pompous, self-righteous Remoaner snowflakes who were the ones who can't take a bit of ribbing without getting upset.
-
Albie
So what are you suggesting?
That we give up rational debate and have a policy of pushing OUR version of reality more effectively than they push THEIR version?
No Billy,
What I am saying is that the way in which a different interpretation is sold is not by counter assertion, or an appeal to consider detail that is outside the world view of the target audience.
So how do you respect the fact that people voted a particular way for their own reasons, which are different to yours, while bringing some real world considerations into play?
It depends in part on how you put a question.
"Bring back control" is a powerful meme to those who feel that they have no control. The false association is concluding that the EU is the reason that they experience that powerlessness.
Those without control or belief in their future prospects will still be as vulnerable after Brexit as they were when voting. It is precisely to exploit that weakness that the Leave campaign seeks to achieve.
Maybe one suggestion would be to commit to a root and branch reform of the electoral system, new rules governing the relationship of commercial interests to the political process. There are a whole set of potential reforms that might give those on the outside a reason to really take back control, not just hand it to the JRM,BJ crew.
Perhaps the UK should really bottom out the true reasons for discontent...........like austerity, creeping privatisation, disregard of social welfare, public sector cuts leading to lack of services, regressive taxation etc.........and come up with a plan to abolish all those worries.
It might just catch on.
-
Ah.
I'm getting in now Albie.
So, you're saying that when the Leave campaign came up with lines like "Take Back Control", Remainers were slipping up quite badly by responding with "I'd mark the EU at 7/10 but it's important that we have I ternational efforts on environmental issues because plastic bags dropped in the Pacific off Colombia can end up in Japan"?
I'm entirely with you comrade.
-
Perhaps they should have Billy. It would have made more sense than Cameron warning of a crash in house prices (to frighten owners and landlords) which had the effect of making people who couldn't afford to get on the housing ladder in their area think 'Sounds good to me, I'll have some of that'.
-
One way of looking at "Take back control" is that it is a great hookline, fit to hold whatever ideas you want to throw in the basket.
The key point is that it sold the idea of change.
What the change would mean , and who would benefit long term....those were in the great never never.
If you buy into the need to ring some changes, and the message from Remain is "more of the same", all you see is repeat failure.
So the more powerful message is the one that promises change.
The political challenge is to define that change according to values that hold meaning for voters.
Steve Bannon understood all this, and put it to good use. Helped of course by Facebook and Cambridge Analytica.
Its not just what you say, and the way you say it, but also how you tap into aspiration.
The Labour Party has been very poor at this in recent years, both Brown and Miliband being hopeless communicators.
Lets hope for better, eh!
-
I see you're off and running in the 2019 Whataboutery Stakes, Wilts.
-
Albie.
You've lost me with that bit of Campaigning Boilerplate 101. Are you now saying you can only win if you offer change?
-
In the UK at the moment, off the back of austerity and all its trappings...................yes, change needs to be offered.
That does not mean that you will win, but it does increase the chance of maxing your vote.
For the record, I do not think Labour is likely to win an overall majority in a GE.
The realistic target is to become the largest party, with the option of forming a government with SNP support.
Some in the Labour Party have not done the numbers.........numeracy matters, at least to get to the goal of electoral reform.
-
I entirely agree that change from Austerity is necessary.
That's a totally different subject from what we were discussing though.
-
No BST,
It is another angle on the same subject. Brexit votes can only be seen in the context of austerity IMO.
Do you think that the Brexit debate would have panned out in the same way if it had taken place in 2006, before the economy had to be rescued from predatory banksters?
-
Albie
You are preaching to the converted. Back in 2010 in this very place, I was predicting what the consequence was going to be of Clegg empowering Austerity.
But we are where we are now.
Those of the Left who want to airbrush over Brexit because everything will be alright once Corbyn is elected are dangerously deluded for any number of reasons - only one of which is that we may get Brexit and STILL have a right wing Govt which will define the post-Brexit Britain.
So how about we get back to the subject at hand, rather than divert off into tangential subjects?
-
''Don’t expect Brexit to give us a British Alexander Hamilton''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/brexit-british-alexander-hamilton-revolutionaries
PS if you're mistakenly pissed off over thinking we are being badly treated
by the EU, you ain't seen nothing yet if we do leave.
What a load of twaddle
The point I'm trying to make here, well or not is that if anyone is thinking we will be in a better bargaining position with the EU following any type of brexit is going to sadly disappointed, happy for you to explain how this will not be true Wilts.
-
This Brexit thing eh?
The masses rebelling against the Elite.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Sathnam/status/1080399650342006784
-
At least you can get a pizza on board... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46748193
-
Jesus wept.
Too daft to laugh at on The Thick Of It.
-
The EU will bottle it at the last minute when they see thirty nine big ones going down the tubes.
-
''Don’t expect Brexit to give us a British Alexander Hamilton''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/brexit-british-alexander-hamilton-revolutionaries
PS if you're mistakenly pissed off over thinking we are being badly treated
by the EU, you ain't seen nothing yet if we do leave.
What a load of twaddle
The point I'm trying to make here, well or not is that if anyone is thinking we will be in a better bargaining position with the EU following any type of brexit is going to sadly disappointed, happy for you to explain how this will not be true Wilts.
Well I could have a go Sydney but I would only be playing devil's advocate as I think you are replying to a post by Sproty?
-
The EU will bottle it at the last minute when they see thirty nine big ones going down the tubes.
Sorry I don't understand, what is the 'it' the EU are going to bottle? They have already agreed and signed off their deal with Mrs May - it's our government who can't agree with that deal nor can it agree what deal it does or doesn't want.
-
Wilts
Our guest from London appears to be one of these people who thinks that a group of countries with a combined ANNUAL GDP of £14 trillion will shite it and offer us whatever we demand if we threaten to withhold £39 billion spread over several years.
It's a quaintly amusing thought, but you DO have to hope he's got a grown up or two to look after him.
-
When it's better for EU country's businesses for their UK competitors to be outside the SM/CU, I really can't see why they'll bottle anything. As for the 39 big ones, they just won't give us a trade deal until we've paid up. Neither will anyone else while we show two-facedness on such a grand scale.
-
''Don’t expect Brexit to give us a British Alexander Hamilton''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/31/brexit-british-alexander-hamilton-revolutionaries
PS if you're mistakenly pissed off over thinking we are being badly treated
by the EU, you ain't seen nothing yet if we do leave.
What a load of twaddle
The point I'm trying to make here, well or not is that if anyone is thinking we will be in a better bargaining position with the EU following any type of brexit is going to sadly disappointed, happy for you to explain how this will not be true Wilts.
Well I could have a go Sydney but I would only be playing devil's advocate as I think you are replying to a post by Sproty?
Thanks Wilts, apologies, Sporty please step up and answer the question, or I suppose anyone?
-
A car and three passengers to Calais please.
Would you like fries with that?
-
What I want to know is, if I order two large passenger ferries for collection, on a Monday, do I get free garlic bread?
-
Garlic? Bloody forrin muck!
-
Wilts
Our guest from London appears to be one of these people who thinks that a group of countries with a combined ANNUAL GDP of £14 trillion will shite it and offer us whatever we demand if we threaten to withhold £39 billion spread over several years.
It's a quaintly amusing thought, but you DO have to hope he's got a grown up or two to look after him.
No, I roam the streets on my own. Care in the community I think it's called.
-
You know, I'm sure this sort of shit used to be a resigning matter for Cabinet Secretaries.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Hayley_Barlow/status/1080528253075537920
f**k me, what HAVE we become?
-
You know, I'm sure this sort of shit used to be a resigning matter for Cabinet Secretaries.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Hayley_Barlow/status/1080528253075537920
f**k me, what HAVE we become?
The calibre of most modern politicians on all sides is abysmal compared to years gone by. Where are the Enoch Powell and Tony Benn of today?
-
Unfortunately, we have far too many egomaniac gobshites like those two.
What we are lacking is the sensible, logical, competent sort who make Government work.
I saw a video of Tony Benn recently, from the 1975 referendum campaign. He reminded me of no-one from the modern era so much as Boris Johnson. Smooth, suave, bathing in self-confidence and with his patrician ease, spinning a line that I know for a fact to be a lie.
We've always had his sort. Politics attracts them. We need more diligence and less ego.
-
Unfortunately, we have far too many egomaniac gobshites like those two.
What we are lacking is the sensible, logical, competent sort who make Government work.
I saw a video of Tony Benn recently, from the 1975 referendum campaign. He reminded me of no-one from the modern era so much as Boris Johnson. Smooth, suave, bathing in self-confidence and with his patrician ease, spinning a line that I know for a fact to be a lie.
We've always had his sort. Politics attracts them. We need more diligence and less ego.
[/quote
BST, we have plenty of dills we need more gence to make it work
-
Serious question here, not joking! If there was to be REF2, what other than a bit of short term financial ease would you say to persuade me to change my mind, bearing in my serious worries over immigration etc?
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
But no-one will want to be an immigrant to a country that's gone down the toilet!
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
-
Give me f**king strength!
Yes. But they will sell fewer to us, and we will sell fewer of our exports to them. Because we are choosing to make trade harder and more expensive.
And EVERY reliable economist who has studied this says that the net effect will be to scrub several percent off our GDP for many, many years to come.
What is it about those predictions that make you and your like determined to ignore them? Why is the response always "We'll be alright"?
If a mechanic told you your engine will blow up if you do 60 down the motorway, would you jump in the car and floor it?
If a doctor told you that your drinking was going to kill you, would you go and order a crate of scotch?
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
The UK are going to have an advantage over the Germans when selling cars in the UK because German cars will be 10% more expensive in the UK.
In return, the Germans are going to have an advantage over the UK when selling cars in 27 other countries because UK cars will be 10% more expensive in all those 27 countries.
And you think they're worried? Jesus wept.
-
Only just seen the post from BST saying that discussion of the reasons for Brexit is straying into "tangentials".
It seems to me that until you can understand how we got to be in this position, we are less likely to be able to find a reasonable way out of it.
I still hope someone will step up with an idea of what a sensible left field response would be to the current impasse.
Assuming May gets the bumsrush next week when her plan is voted down, what happens next?
Disgruntled Tories defect to Indy's, refusing the whip?
No operational majority to allow government business through the HoC?
A view from outside is sometimes useful:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/british-brexit-debate-democratic-opportunity-by-yanis-varoufakis-2018-12
At least Varoufakis tries to set out a response to the real kerfuffle behind the conundrum.
Pick and mix from that then!
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
The UK are going to have an advantage over the Germans when selling cars in the UK because German cars will be 10% more expensive in the UK.
In return, the Germans are going to have an advantage over the UK when selling cars in 27 other countries because UK cars will be 10% more expensive in all those 27 countries.
And you think they're worried? Jesus wept.
Actually it will be more than that Glyn, that's 10% on the cost of finished cars. The British motor industry uses a lot of parts not manufactured in the UK and all these will also accrue duty, so it will cost a lot more to manufacture cars in the UK. According to the SMM a no deal Brexit will cost the motor industry £2.7 billion with a 10% import tariff. Then another £1.8 billion on exports.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/industry-topics/brexit/
That's why Billy's favourite economist, Patrick Minford, said we should abandon the motor industry in the UK as we did with coal mining and iron and steel.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/devastating-future-welsh-manufacturing-predicted-15323164
So actually AL is correct the Germans' will still sell cars in the UK after Brexit, probably more of them, as there wont be any British cars to buy.
-
Unfortunately, we have far too many egomaniac gobshites like those two.
What we are lacking is the sensible, logical, competent sort who make Government work.
I saw a video of Tony Benn recently, from the 1975 referendum campaign. He reminded me of no-one from the modern era so much as Boris Johnson. Smooth, suave, bathing in self-confidence and with his patrician ease, spinning a line that I know for a fact to be a lie.
We've always had his sort. Politics attracts them. We need more diligence and less ego.
Billy, you perplex me; you're obviously a great intellect, and an absolute expert on economics and financial matters. However, what are you politically?; are you a socialist?, a liberalist?, a democrat?; what are you?, because I can tell you one thing, I've been on this planet a lot longer than you, and I know for a certain fact that Tony Benn was and is a working class hero to almost every genuine socialist in this country, who would regard opponents of his as Tory thinking people.
Would I be right in assuming you're a great fan of the 3 stooges, Blair, Campbell, and Mandelson?; if so, that would explain a lot.
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
The UK are going to have an advantage over the Germans when selling cars in the UK because German cars will be 10% more expensive in the UK.
In return, the Germans are going to have an advantage over the UK when selling cars in 27 other countries because UK cars will be 10% more expensive in all those 27 countries.
And you think they're worried? Jesus wept.
Actually it will be more than that Glyn, that's 10% on the cost of finished cars. The British motor industry uses a lot of parts not manufactured in the UK and all these will also accrue duty, so it will cost a lot more to manufacture cars in the UK. According to the SMM a no deal Brexit will cost the motor industry £2.7 billion with a 10% import tariff. Then another £1.8 billion on exports.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/industry-topics/brexit/
That's why Billy's favourite economist, Patrick Minford, said we should abandon the motor industry in the UK as we did with coal mining and iron and steel.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/devastating-future-welsh-manufacturing-predicted-15323164
So actually AL is correct the Germans' will still sell cars in the UK after Brexit, probably more of them, as there wont be any British cars to buy.
Importing parts to be fitted to cars that are then exported in their turn doesn't cost any duty if done under IPR. But you have to maintain the audit trail and paperwork for it.
-
Scawsby
I put myself in the pragmatic Left wing of the Labour party. Way to the left of Blair (I resigned my membership because of him).
Benn was, in my opinion, a dangerous egomaniac who did phenomenal harm to the Labour movement and the working class. He, more than anyone [1] was responsible for driving ideological wedges through the Left in the 1970s and 80s. The collapse of Labour as an election-winning unit in the early 80s, meant that Thatcher had unrestrained power to smash the Unions and the industrial North.
Benn is to a great extent to blame for that.
And that's before you look at his ridiculous approach to foreign policy. Read his diaries as I have. He was smitten by Ceacescu as a role model. He thought what he was doing g in Romania was a model for socialists. It was naive idiocy like that which helped keep psychopaths like Ceacescu in power.
For me, the Labour party must first of all be electable. Everything else comes secondary. Blair was way too far to the right and I argued that aggressively at the time. But I'd rather have a Blair-led Labour party in power than a Benn (or Corbyn) led party failing to win power.
To me, that is blindingly obvious logic. I'm regularly surprised how many people on the Left don't share it. To them, ideological purity is the number 1 requirement. Electability comes secondary.
[1] David Owen shares an equal proportion of the blame. Another patrician-class egomaniac who put his own beliefs and ambitions above the wider requirements of the Labour movement.
-
Albie
If you're going to find a way out of this mess, you've got to start by putting aside starry-eyed ideas that there's going to be some sort of revolution on the Right that will bring this Govt down.
It. Won't. Happen.
Whatever happens between now and 29 March, there will be a Tory Govt propped up by the DUP in April, and for the following 3 years.
Labour supporters need to get that I to their heads sharpish. Because if Brexit DOES happen, post-Brexit Britain is going to be shaped by a right wing Govt.
You navel gaze all you want about why we got here and how we get out. In the meantime, the future direction of our country will be being fixed for you.
Number 1 priority. Bar none. Stop a right-wing Brexit. Everything else, including a Corbyn election victory comes a distant second to that. Because if you DON'T stop that, there is nothing that a future Lab Govt can do to repair the damage.
-
BST,
All offers on the table are right wing Brexits.
I would prefer to stop it. Only the government can!
You may be right that the Tories will plough on, under a new leader.
If they are able to deliver a working program going forward....that remains to be seen.
The likes of Johnson and crew will pitch for a deregulated future, in the tax haven model.
No-one wants to see that, apart from vulture bankers.
So if you don't want a right wing Brexit, what do you want instead.
Yes, I know you want ref2, but the government have got to make that happen.
Why should they, unless they have no choice because they can't operate without a working majority?
If you think that there is nothing a future Labour Government could do, after Brexit, then abandon ship sharpish, Lad.
That is why I posted the Varoufakis piece...it is about alternatives either side of March deadline.
-
Albie
You've lost me.
There's not going to be Ref2 because it requires the Govt to decide on that.
So instead, you suggest we take up Varoufakis's plan to put the whole thing on hold while we have a national discussion on how to sort out 300 years worth of constitutional problems?
Lovely theory. What's the mechanism by which it comes about in practice?
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
The UK are going to have an advantage over the Germans when selling cars in the UK because German cars will be 10% more expensive in the UK.
In return, the Germans are going to have an advantage over the UK when selling cars in 27 other countries because UK cars will be 10% more expensive in all those 27 countries.
And you think they're worried? Jesus wept.
Actually it will be more than that Glyn, that's 10% on the cost of finished cars. The British motor industry uses a lot of parts not manufactured in the UK and all these will also accrue duty, so it will cost a lot more to manufacture cars in the UK. According to the SMM a no deal Brexit will cost the motor industry £2.7 billion with a 10% import tariff. Then another £1.8 billion on exports.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/industry-topics/brexit/
That's why Billy's favourite economist, Patrick Minford, said we should abandon the motor industry in the UK as we did with coal mining and iron and steel.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/devastating-future-welsh-manufacturing-predicted-15323164
So actually AL is correct the Germans' will still sell cars in the UK after Brexit, probably more of them, as there wont be any British cars to buy.
Importing parts to be fitted to cars that are then exported in their turn doesn't cost any duty if done under IPR. But you have to maintain the audit trail and paperwork for it.
Thanks Glyn. So when the government said this about components in their impact assessments were they referring to spare parts or bits to be fitted to cars only for sale in UK:
On departure, in the absence of an agreement on trade, this would mean a reversion to World Trade Organisation (WTO) tariffs. These are 10 per cent for cars and, on average, 4.5 per cent for vehicle components.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmbeis/379/37905.htm
-
"Short-term financial ease" meaning "the country not losing several trillion pounds worth of economic activity over the next couple of decades"?
I'd have thought that would be enough for starters.
You say that but it's not as if the Germans are going to stop selling motors here and the like is it, life will still go on.
The UK are going to have an advantage over the Germans when selling cars in the UK because German cars will be 10% more expensive in the UK.
In return, the Germans are going to have an advantage over the UK when selling cars in 27 other countries because UK cars will be 10% more expensive in all those 27 countries.
And you think they're worried? Jesus wept.
Actually it will be more than that Glyn, that's 10% on the cost of finished cars. The British motor industry uses a lot of parts not manufactured in the UK and all these will also accrue duty, so it will cost a lot more to manufacture cars in the UK. According to the SMM a no deal Brexit will cost the motor industry £2.7 billion with a 10% import tariff. Then another £1.8 billion on exports.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/industry-topics/brexit/
That's why Billy's favourite economist, Patrick Minford, said we should abandon the motor industry in the UK as we did with coal mining and iron and steel.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/devastating-future-welsh-manufacturing-predicted-15323164
So actually AL is correct the Germans' will still sell cars in the UK after Brexit, probably more of them, as there wont be any British cars to buy.
Importing parts to be fitted to cars that are then exported in their turn doesn't cost any duty if done under IPR. But you have to maintain the audit trail and paperwork for it.
Thanks Glyn. So when the government said this about components in their impact assessments were they referring to spare parts or bits to be fitted to cars only for sale in UK:
On departure, in the absence of an agreement on trade, this would mean a reversion to World Trade Organisation (WTO) tariffs. These are 10 per cent for cars and, on average, 4.5 per cent for vehicle components.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmbeis/379/37905.htm
Yep, anything intended to stay in the country is liable to Customs Duty. As for the parts intended for re-export you have to know that that is the intention at the time they cross the Customs Border as the declaration has to be direct into the IPR regime, so you can't import something, pay Duty on it to put it into free circulation and then try and claim the Duty back if you subsequently re-export after that.
PS We caught a lot of people out who were trying it on when there was a craze for quad bikes about ten years ago. A lot of them tried to get away with declaring them as motorcycles at 8% duty. But motorcycles have two wheels - quadbikes have four, so are motor vehicles at 10%.
-
BST,
I did not suggest taking up the Varafakis plan.
I do think some of the issues raised in the article need to have a discussion on the left, in preparation for Brexit, or after any Brexit takes place.
As I said, there is no clear mechanism to deliver Ref2, so it is off the table until the circumstances allow it to happen.
Not sure that you really understand political strategy.
You hold strong views about where it should go, but no SatNav to help get there.
-
For what it's worth, my take is that the Varoufakis link.is juvenile, self-indulgent nonsense. There is zero possibility in the current climate that that approach is going to be put into action in the next 2.5 months. It's Yannis doing what Yannis does. Showing how clever and strategic he is, and giving himself space to shake his head sagely when other people have to deal with the world as it actually is.
Which brings us back to the real world.
Why will there be a Ref2? Because that's the real world path of least resistance.
May's deal will be defeated.
Parliament will not allow us to leave with No Deal.
Tribal loyalties will prevent May's Govt from falling.
So we get to mid Feb and there is one and only one option left.
The Govt will ask for A.50 to be suspended while we ask the country to give a clear steer to a deadlocked House, in an unambiguous STV referendum.
There is no other credible outcome.
The political manoeuvring between now and then is all about who takes the credit/avoids the blame for that outcome.
If I'm going to be kind to Corbyn, I'll say that he is mistakenly trying to demonstrate to Leave Labour supporters that he's not forsaking them, and missing the fact that he's pissing off a much larger number of Labour Remainers. But that's being kind. My gut says he feels one of his lifelong political aims, getting the UK out of the EU, slipping through his fingers.
-
Thanks Glyn, who would have thought information on customs duties would be so interesting.
-
Thanks Glyn, who would have thought information on customs duties would be so interesting.
I've just re-read my last post and had to change a can for a can't that I miswrote.
As for Customs being interesting, don't get me started on the time I secured £12mill in Duty when every scrap importer in the country (who all happened to be in Sheffield!) was using the wrong commodity code on scrap titanium. It's riveting, honest. ;)
-
Billy I reckon you are totally wrong about Corbyn (now there's a surprise) he is not trying to appeal to Labour Leave voters - he is trying to appeal to Leave voters in their 35 marginal Tory target seats. We have said many times that the polls show Labour has poor support among Leave voters - and thats who he needs to win over if he wants to win a snap GE.
I am also unconvinced that the government would call a referendum. If May has been consistent about one thing (and there is very little she has been consistent about) it's that she won't support another referendum/People's Vote. Every week at PMQ's she rules this out - while also accusing Corbyn of wanting one to betray the result of the first one.
Rumour on the internet has it that she will be on the Marr show on Sunday talking about the NHS and her funding commitment to it. Why on earth, on the eve of the most important vote in the HoC for 80 years is she going on a major political talk show to discuss the NHS?
Another rumour has it that returning officers across the UK have been put on standby.
All of which probably mean you shouldn't listen to rumours unless you are in a Fleetwood Mac covers band....
-
This might be a reason why BST is batting a sticky wicket here:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/01/poll-conservative-members-shows-why-people-s-vote-so-unlikely
As I keep saying, the numbers matter.....as much in the Tory Party as in the HoC.
-
Wilts
1) I cannot see what possible reason May would have for calling a GE.
2) I guess, at a push, she might threaten to do so to bring some of her rebels into line, but then for the most part they are not stupid and would refer to point 1.
3) Regarding her calling Ref2, you display a touching faith in May's steadfastness when she has gone on record. This is the woman who said there'd be no GE in 2017. The woman who said the vote on her deal wasn't going to be pulled. Her being set against Ref2 to date means bugger all. When she has no other option, she will call it.
4) As with every other supporter of Corbyn's Brexit approach [1] you are focussing on him brilliantly wooing Leave supporters but ignoring the great big Woolly Mammoth in the room. There was a YG poll before Xmas. Lab were on 36%. They then asked "If there was a GE and Lab went into it with a policy to support Ref2, how would you vote?" The result was Lab 36%.
They THEN asked: If there was a GE and Lab went into it supporting Brexit, how would you vote?" The result was Lab 22%.
The fact that Corbyn went on record days later saying his policy was to push for a GE at which he would supporting Brexit was quite astonishing.
As in so many things though, we're not allowed to question the wisdom of the Blessed Jeremy the Infallible.
[1] Speaking of which, I see the meme of choice among worshippers at the Church of the Latter Day Jeremy is "Love Corbyn. Hate Brexit." It's the equivalent of Donny fans in the Conference days saying "Love Carl Alford. Hate Never Scoring."
-
Albie.
That article ignores two points.
1) There is a sizeable group of Tory MPs who are so ideologically anti-Brexit that they would undoubtedly ignore the party base. Think Soubry, Grieve, Wollaston, Clarke et al. With a united opposition, there'd be enough votes to call for Ref2.
2) It's amazing, the things that become politically possible, nay, attractive, when every other avenue has been closed off.
-
Getting serious folks.
https://m.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2248533055471427/
-
There's a rumour doing the rounds that May has a cunning plan to get around the backstop, she's going to use one of bojo's old brainfarts and build a garden bridge direct from Dublin to Calais.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46772601
Looks like the vote on May's Deal isn't going ahead then...
-
Clusterf**k doesn't even come close to describing this whole situation anymore.
-
Rumour this morning was that Labour are considering abstaining on the vote on May's deal, meaning it will pass.
Idea is that the DUP would then vote against Govt on a No Confidence vote, hence forcing a GE.
It's a thought I suppose. But if Corbyn pulls that stunt, then goes into the GE saying Labour will implement Brexit, Labour will be annihilated. They'll make Foot 1983 look like a mild setback.
-
Rumour this morning was that Labour are considering abstaining on the vote on May's deal, meaning it will pass.
Idea is that the DUP would then vote against Govt on a No Confidence vote, hence forcing a GE.
It's a thought I suppose. But if Corbyn pulls that stunt, then goes into the GE saying Labour will implement Brexit, Labour will be annihilated. They'll make Foot 1983 look like a mild setback.
Too much personal politics in play for my liking
-
It's not personal Filo.
It's ideological.
Corbyn has an obsession. That the EU is a Very Bad Thing. And that we could have True Socialism in the UK and we could do fine outside the EU.
It's utter f**king bobbins, but he tends to move in circles where he only gets confirmation of what he believes. And folk who challenge him are called, NeoLibs, Blairites, Red Tories, Centrists, (Corbynistas...help me out here... Have I missed some?)
-
Tricks , sleights of hands - promises broken. I hope the electorate can be persuaded after this debacle is over one way or another that there HAS to be a better way than the way we are "represented" now
I know that is no part of B****t discussions but surely it should be the nxt "big thing" though I can seriously believe either of the big 2 will move anywhere quickly as they have the most to lose of course
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-kent-46775722?__twitter_impression=true
Let me get this right. You claim you are late for work because the Govt has decided to test just how f**ked the rush hour traffic will be if they release 87 additional trucks onto an already busy road? And you say they are doing it as contingency planning for a scenario that everyone knows will not happen because it is imbecillicly stupid to even contemplate it?
Put the other one son. Wages docked for arriving late.
-
The whole thing is laughable - but not in a good way !
-
The whole thing is laughable - but not in a good way !
It's a desperate scare tactic just like having troops on standby.
-
I'm sure, when we crash out with no deal, there'll only be 80 lorries wanting to cross the channel. I'm sure none of them will want to do it at rush hour either. Waste of time.
-
I'm sure, when we crash out with no deal, there'll only be 80 lorries wanting to cross the channel. I'm sure none of them will want to do it at rush hour either. Waste of time.
The terminology 'crash out without a deal' is rampant scare mongering.
-
What term would you use?
Given that we're 81 days away from leaving, and so little prep has been do e for a No Deal scenario that the Health Secretary is scuttling round Europe buying every spare industrial freezer he can find for us to be able to stockpile short lifetime medicines which will get blocked in tailbacks at ports?
And the Transport Secretary is giving contracts to increase shipping g freight capacity to a company that has never operated a ship, to operate ships from a port that doesn't have the physical capacity to handle container ferries, or the road network to move large numbers of lorries away from the port.
And then there's the fact that we don't have enough customs staff to process the new paperwork that would be required for goods moving between the UK and EU. Or enough vets to process the admin of live animals crossing a customs and market border.
And the fact that the motor industry, working to Just In Time processes, have said that any delays at ports to the shipment of parts to/from the EU will totally screw up their production.
And then there's the fact that if we leave with No Deal, you suddenly have a hard border in Ireland to police.
All that to sort out in 11 and a half weeks. By a Govt that couldn't even rustle up the 150 trucks that it wanted to use in Operation Brock this morning.
And you reckon a No Deal scenario wouldn't be "crashing out" of the EU?
Go on then. Tell us why it would all be smoothly handled.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/07/may-will-win-vote-on-her-deal-on-15-january-says-brexit-minister
The man's delusional.
Also - who the f**k is he?
-
I’m not sure where this notion of a second vote comes from should the first vote fail. To use Maybots mantra, would n’t a second vote betray the will of Parliament?
-
The reason a no deal brexit is going to be a glorious rip roaring success leading to a 1000 year long utopian society rather than "crashing out" is simple.
The power of positive thinking Billy THE POWER OF POSITIVE THINKING.If we all believe its going to work then it will. Its obvious really?
I dont know if you've seen "Field of dreams" with Kevin Costner but its a bit like that (just without the stupid foreign rounders for girls bullsh*t). We all just close our eyes and repeat "theres no place like home...." over and over until everything works itself out.
The only way it can fail is if people like you, Gary Lineker and HSBC start being all negative and ruin the delicate spiritual balance with all you "facts" and "logical consequences". That stuff massively p*sses off the good vibes and makes them angry bad vibes and then and only then could things turn sour but that'll be your fault not mine.
Be a team player lets all together on the count of three think positive brexit thoughts and let the cosmic world guide us to a greater collective self. #Ivotedleavebutitsdefinitelyeveryoneelsesfaultwhatshappeningnow #noseriouslyitdefinitelydefinitelyis
#iamnotresponsiblesodontneedtolearnanylessonssofeckoffhippytwits
-
A second vote on the May deal is not possible under parliamentary rules.
The proposal can only return if it has been significantly revised, something the EU has already ruled out.
What is likely is failure of the May deal, followed by amendments tabled under the Grieve amendment.
Horse trading will then take place on the least damaging consensus according to where the votes lie.
My bet is "Norway Plus" emerging from the fog, and Article 50 (March deadline) being postponed.
-
Britain 2019.
https://t.co/4HUyQECv5y
Going well, int it?
-
I'm sure, when we crash out with no deal, there'll only be 80 lorries wanting to cross the channel. I'm sure none of them will want to do it at rush hour either. Waste of time.
The terminology 'crash out without a deal' is rampant scare mongering.
The terminology 'scare mongering' is rampant sticking your fingers in your ears going 'la-la-la-la-la-la-la' mongering.
-
Britain 2019.
https://t.co/4HUyQECv5y
Going well, int it?
Idiots frankly, just like those having a go at Jacob Rees Mogg were. Disagree all you like but don't cross a line. Just prosecute them FFS.
-
not related to the extreme-right wing calling an mp a nazi (irony really is lost on them), but I thought this article was quite amusing: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/04/chris-grayling-brexit-pizza-ferry-company-zero-ships?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR2QYcBsB2mTCejEC9ib4TBVvndO7qv-6jxPq2cqwBp6a53ixFA1xPTtkwI
-
Just been listening to this while driving to a meeting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0001xs9
Plus ça change, as they say.
-
Also, fascinating to hear the non-British that is the Brexit Secretary on R4 this morning.
He was asked half a dozen times if he could deny that officials had been discussing with the EU extending A50 beyond 29 March. Half a dozen times he said, "Err...I can confirm that I haven't been having those discussions".
So, we're extending A50 then...
-
Also, fascinating to hear the non-British that is the Brexit Secretary on R4 this morning.
He was asked half a dozen times if he could deny that officials had been discussing with the EU extending A50 beyond 29 March. Half a dozen times he said, "Err...I can confirm that I haven't been having those discussions".
So, we're extending A50 then...
I am surprised that any serious politician would take the job of Brexit Secretary while May is PM. He's basically a glorified office boy.
-
In all fairness I don't know who he is and I can't remember his name. If Dominic Raab was a non-entity, this bloke is pure anti-matter. When you try to Google him it just says "404 file not found".
-
I remember when I got 'promoted' to senior accounts administrator.
No change in salary and barely any change in duties, just got some of my work took off me and given to a young lass that I then had to 'supervise'.
He's basically me but on a small fortune.
I mean at least Raab looked like a shit Bond villain. What's this fella got going for him?
-
One step closer to the endgame tonight.
The vote tonight is symbolic, but it does effectively show that there is a majority in the House to stop even funding for preparation for No Deal.
Some folk are saying that when May loses next week, she'll go all in on No Deal anyway. Which she could in principle, because if her deal gets voted down, the only way ND can be avoided is for the Govt to bring primary legislation to change the A50 process.
Personally I don't believe that even someone as pig headed as May would dig her heels in and go for ND. Because she knows that leading us into a catastrophe like that with no preparation would be the final nail in her historical legacy.
But tonight probably shows that she couldn't do that anyway. 20 Tories are so against ND that they were prepared to vote against May tonight. That says a lot. If May loses the vote on her deal next week, and then tried to go for ND, I reckon those 20 would do anything to stop her. Including voting with Labour on a NC vote to bring her down.
And she will know that. So she won't go for ND because that is the end of her career.
So, when her deal is voted down next week, what the f**k happens then?
-
I think that she is that pig headed she will go for a no deal, her reputation is in tatters anyway
-
Going on what she's done before, I think when she loses the vote she'll just stall and do nothing. One final kick of the can down the road as time ticks away.
-
Filo
Aye. But if she does, that's the end of her career. Tonight's vote has shown that there are enough Tory MPs prepared to defy the Govt over ND. So her going for ND will result in the Govt falling. And her career ending.
That's inescapable.
And I've never yet seen a politician prepared to put themselves in a position where they know beforehand that they are going to finish their career.
So, unless she has genuinely lost touch with reality, she won't go for ND.
-
Glyn
That's the worry.
That would tie in with the two recent rumours
1) We are negotiating to extend the Leave date. To give time for...
2) May bringing tiny variants of her deal back to Parliament over and over and over again until she gets it through.
Remember that she can't be unseated by her own MPs bringing her down now, for another year. And she can't be unseated by Parliament voting against her in a NC vote unless she does something to make a couple of dozen Tory MPs vote with Lab in a NC vote.
So the perma-f**k-up approach might well end up being the most likely one.
But f**king hell. How excruciatingly humiliating would that be for her?
-
BST,
May cannot do (2) because of parliamentary rules;
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit
Scroll down......If she tries it on there would be a constitutional fracas.
Because she cannot be unseated as Tory leader for a year, Mp's have to remove her by promoting her resignation, or voting to support a GE.
A simple majority against in a vote of no confidence brings a GE.
They won't lean to the latter as first base, so the question becomes how do they make her position untenable?
-
I think that she is that pig headed she will go for a no deal, her reputation is in tatters anyway
She will say "we must deliver on the will of the British people a lot" as well !
Wonder how many times she has said that in the last 2 years
More than "we will deliver a strong and stable Government" although that was sickeningly often
-
Albie
A constitutional fracas?
From whom?
One thing and one thing only matters in our system. Parliamentary arithmetic. A Govt can do whatever Parliament doesn't prevent it from doing.
It may be that 20 Tory MPs are so devoted to upholding constitutional niceties that they bring the Govt down if May does try to keep bringing her deal back. But there's nothing to stop her doing so outside that event.
-
Like you’ve said all along BST, yesterday’s outcome shows how much MPs are against a no deal option.
-
Gaz
Been clear all along. If the vote last night had actually been a straight yes/no to No Deal, the majority would have been far higher.
There's not going to be No Deal. At least not without some spectacular loss of nerve by a lot of Tory MPs.
-
BST,
From whom?.....The law, Billy!
The UK is still bound by EU law, and is also constrained by precedent in the interpretation of UK statute.
Procedural rules are precisely to prevent creative interpretation by rogue governments.
When you say:
"One thing and one thing only matters in our system. Parliamentary arithmetic. A Govt can do whatever Parliament doesn't prevent it from doing",
I doubt you will find a constitutional expert to agree with this.
But I am constantly surprised by events...May is certainly a complete chancer.....lets see, eh!
-
Albie
I'm struggling to see anything in that link you posted that explicitly, legally prevents May from doing precisely what I said in point 2 last night.
Opinions and hypotheses, but nothing definitive.
-
Well, well, well. Tory MPs ratcheting things up.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46805269
THAT makes step 2 now very unlikley.
-
But what can she do realistically, the EU have said they won't renegotiate.
-
Albie
I'm struggling to see anything in that link you posted that explicitly, legally prevents May from doing precisely what I said in point 2 last night.
Opinions and hypotheses, but nothing definitive.
Under the heading: If Parliament rejects the deal first time it has been suggested the Government could bring it back again, the IFG advice Albie posted in his link says:
Ultimately, whether the second motion is the same in substance to the first, and so whether it could be brought forward again during the same session, is for the Speaker of the HoC to decide. In making this decision, the Speaker is likely to consider the mood of the House.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit
In the light of today's shenanigans would you now like to reconsider your earlier reply Billy?
-
But what can she do realistically, the EU have said they won't renegotiate.
She'll try and do what politicians always do - change a few words and give something a different name and hope no-one notices it's exactly the same.
-
Wilts.
I don't follow. It says the Speaker would likely consider the mood of the House. So it's all about the opinions of MPs. As I said.
Today is important of course, because it indicates that the mood of enough Tory MPs is hardening. That's the point.
-
Sweet God up above, this is getting ridiculous.
https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1083031865735430146
So May now wants Parliament to vote on an amendment to her deal that drives a coach and horses through the deal that she spent months agreeing with the EU.
If this passes, Parliament will have signed up to a deal which is not a deal that is acceptable to the EU.
Then presumably she goes back to the EU and says "this is the only deal that I can get passed in Parliament. You'll have to trust me that we will make sure Ireland doesn't get f**ked over in 12 months." And the EU says, "Trust you? Trust YOU who has just reneged on the deal that we agreed with you?"
And we now have 11 weeks and 2 days till we leave.
What an utter f**king shambles.
-
They're not even hiding their contempt for Parliamentary scrutiny now...
https://mobile.twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1082996064179970053
-
Other views are that government amendment is meaningless
https://twitter.com/Peston
-
My reading of today is that the speaker will do as much as possible, including breaking parliamentary procedure and precedent, to oppose Brexit. Thus if/when May brings her deal back with only minor changes he will refuse to raise it in the house. And then they will.....
-
Righto.
So it shows her mendacity to the world while not helping her at all in practice.
That's grand...
-
Wilts
Or, to allow Parliament to express its will. Different interpretations...
-
Interesting side effect of Brexit.
I'm sat in a departure lounge at Manchester airport tonight. Big TV screen showing the news. Must have been 100 people crowding round the screen watching the Brexit news. Then when it switched to other news, they drifted away.
Far more people than I can ever remember are connecting with politics.
-
They were Kids once who used to watch Punch and Judy with Wife beating :boxing: and Crocodiles and such stuff
They have never been able to watch such similar "entertainment" from then till now !
As our PM :turd: keeps proving "thats not the way to do it"
-
Of course I've always had faith in Bercow to do the right thing by the people of Britain, he's always displayed fairness, integrity and knowledge of parliamentary rules as he carries out his duties as Speaker.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/100979/commons-speaker-john-bercow-forced-deny-anti-brexit-bias
hehe
-
I don't think Bercow is quite as bad as is made out but clearly he does follow an agenda that suits him. I don't know if that's right of him to do but it's certainly another messy dimension.
The next few weeks are uncertain. Who knows what will happen, there's a lot of unanswered questions.
-
I think the Tory’s think he should be their puppet
-
Calling him biased was out of order imo. I am not an expert in these matters so will leave that there - and I had not idea what was going on in that hour !
One thing I do know is that Parliament should be modernised to make it more understandable to us the Electorate and that could come after (yes here it comes) an overhaul of the Electoral System itself
There is clear evidence that people are out of touch with Politics and think their Vote counts for nothing - so a fairer system should be introduced AND following that an overhaul of the archaic Parliamentary Procedures should follow.
Tradition is fine but its time for the assaciated crap to go !
-
I think the Tory’s think he should be their puppet
Of course, however he is probably a bit the other way. It's far too complex for me but there was a lot of more impartial people much cleverer than me questioning his decision yesterday.
Interesting corbyn again calling for an election. What if it returns another hung parliament or Tory win if it actually happens?
-
Calling him biased was out of order imo. I am not an expert in these matters so will leave that there - and I had not idea what was going on in that hour !
One thing I do know is that Parliament should be modernised to make it more understandable to us the Electorate and that could come after (yes here it comes) an overhaul of the Electoral System itself
There is clear evidence that people are out of touch with Politics and think their Vote counts for nothing - so a fairer system should be introduced AND following that an overhaul of the archaic Parliamentary Procedures should follow.
Tradition is fine but its time for the assaciated crap to go !
Hear hear! sort out the house of lords, have elected MPs, reduce the numbers further, have a proper house of review.
-
I don't think Bercow is quite as bad as is made out but clearly he does follow an agenda that suits him. I don't know if that's right of him to do but it's certainly another messy dimension.
The next few weeks are uncertain. Who knows what will happen, there's a lot of unanswered questions.
Every Speaker's 'agenda' is to stand up for Parliamentary Procedure against whomever is in government at the time. Are you saying that Bercow hasn't done this but acted in his own interest somehow?
-
I wish the government would for once just think of the country. There is a clear majority in the house that doesn't support a no deal brexit; May has tried and failed at getting a decent brexit deal; the only sensible option is to revoke article 50 and cancel brexit. They have the power to do that, and it's what they should do as, by their own admission, the country is better off economically remaining in the EU. BUT every MP has an ego that only just fit's inside the house of commons, so no MP will ever risk losing their seat at the next election based on the dated principle of having morals.... this is the problem, not whether Brexit is a good idea or not, as it's clearly a bad idea.
Just to add, I also like this idea that any new trading partner we have post brexit will be the best thing ever, and we're going to be able to import everything cheaper and make more money with exports. It's a fantastic dream based on absolutlely NOTHING, no historic trade deal ever worked like that, and every country knows that being in a trading bloc, rather than having bi-lateral agreements, is far better for your own economy. Economists around the world are telling the UK that, yet we don't listen to them because they are "experts"??? Bet you wouldn't invite a plumber around fix your oven though!
-
That's all well and good but the majority of the house and policy of the two main parties and both leaders is to deliver Brexit....
-
Few Torys that were going to vote against the deal have now said they will vote for the deal, the snakes are coming out of the grass one by one
-
Few Torys that were going to vote against the deal have now said they will vote for the deal, the snakes are coming out of the grass one by one
Indeed and there's talk of some labour mps perhaps being persuaded. Highly Unlikely but you never know....
-
Hard day at work?
Aye. Me an all. Meeting started at 8am. Just finished. Might be home by 22:00 if I'm lucky.
Good to know some folk can live the life of luxury while the rest of us deal with the shit storm that he created then walked away from.
https://mobile.twitter.com/dinosofos/status/1083303541563932672
-
Hard day at work?
Aye. Me an all. Meeting started at 8am. Just finished. Might be home by 22:00 if I'm lucky.
Good to know some folk can live the life of luxury while the rest of us deal with the shit storm that he created then walked away from.
https://mobile.twitter.com/dinosofos/status/1083303541563932672
I set of at 0545, just got in and got 2hrs work to do tonight, but after seeing that picture I’m getting the surf board out and going down the Don on it.
I saw him in Portugal a couple of years ago with his family. The security on the beach was unreal. There must have been a dozen that were obvious and I’m sure there were others we couldn’t see.
-
Saw Clegg in a park in Sheffield just before the 2015 election. He was taking his kids out. Surrounded by security swivel-heads.
No life.
-
Saw Clegg in a park in Sheffield just before the 2015 election. He was taking his kids out. Surrounded by security swivel-heads.
No life.
Says a lot about our country that there's a need for it. If a lowly backbencher like Jo Cox can be targeted...
-
Every age and place has its psychopaths who would do violence to those who disagree with them.
I do think that the whole atmosphere around Brexit has drawn more out from their lair though.
Like this one.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-lincolnshire-46810637
-
David Lammy MP said the following to Parliament. If only a lot more of our politicians, (on all sides), were as true to their principles for the benefit of their constituents......
Mr Speaker, the European Union was once just a remarkable dream.
A hope that our countries which fought and murdered each other, on an industrial scale twice in one century, could come together. A refusal to return to extreme nationalism. And a determination to prevent more bloody conflicts where tens of millions are killed.
The audacious idea of European Integration was motivated by fear. But it was made possible by shared ideals: democracy, human rights, equality, freedom, and a refusal to submit to the tyranny of fascism, ever again.
After the Second World War, in 1946, Winston Churchill said this:
“If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to” its “happiness,” “prosperity and glory.”
But today some Conservative colleagues talk about “total independence” from Europe as though it is a virtue. Let me remind them, Churchill understood the European dream is to build a whole bigger than the sum of its parts. He understood that it is about pooling sovereignty. Working together. Sharing Control.
Let us now be honest with the country. Total independence is a fantasy.It is the same idea that motivates an angry teenager to run away from their family. Total independence means throwing a tantrum and ending up in the cold. Total independence is selfishness. It is individualism, arrogance, superiority, a refusal to work together, and the break-down of the common good. Total independence will not solve our problems.
Total independence will lead to total isolation.
And let us be honest. Britain did not become Great in total isolation. Britain thrived by becoming the biggest Treaty-Signing power in the world. Britain thrived by signing more than 14,000 treaties in the modern age. We thrived by sharing our sovereignty, not by stockpiling it.
Our NATO membership compels us to deploy soldiers when our fellow members are attacked. The Paris Climate Accord is an agreement that demonstrates how we tackle global threats together, not alone. Even our membership of the WTO commits the UK to supra-national regulation and arbitration of its own.
Mr Speaker, Sovereignty is not an asset to be hoarded. It is a resource which only has value when it is spent.
The hard Brexiteers in this house say they want to Take Back Control. They say that we lost it because of the European Union. But in reality they are still mourning Suez. Britain’s last fling of the Colonial dice. Back then Anthony Eden failed to recognise that Britain was no longer capable of launching a solo imperial adventure. Let us not fall for the same hubris today.
When those on the other side of this debate say they want Empire 2.0. Let us ask, what does that mean? What was imperialism?What was colonialism? Let us not forget this today.
At its worst, the British Empire was exploitation and subjugation. Moral superiority that led to putting humans in shackles. The oppression of black and brown people because this country thought it knew best. Those countries once coloured pink on the globe were not won in negotiations, they were taken by force.
Today we need to build a new image of Britain. One that brings this country together after years of division. We have to use our imagination. Empire 2.0 is not it.
After the global embarrassment of Suez, Britain became the sick man of Europe. The EEC was set up in 1958, but Britain did not join until 1973.
In those years, GDP per head rose 95 per cent in France, Italy and West Germany. Britain only grew at half this rate. Our industry and economy had fallen behind.
Mr Speaker, Europe gave post-imperial Britain a chance to regain some wealth and dignity. In the 40 years since, our economy grew faster than France, Germany and Italy. We restored our position on the global stage. But it was not only our prosperity that increased.
Our allies in the US respected us for our seat at the top table of Europe.And the rest of the world saw us become a confident nation again.
A grown up country, prepared to give and take for the greater good.
The Brexiteer promise to Take Back Control in 2016 was nothing more than a deluded fantasy. A lie that divided friends and families. A lie that pandered to racism and xenophobia. And a lie that caused an extra six hundred and thirty eight Hate Crimes per month.
What does it say about the United Kingdom when the UN sends rapporteurs to warn us of increased racism in our country? What does it say about Britain when our politicians play on the fear of migrants, races and religions, to win votes? What did it say when Nigel Farage stood in front of a Nazi-inspired poster of refugees, with the caption “breaking point”?
The founder of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, spoke of socialism’s “promise of freedom”. Its “larger hope for humanity”. And of “binding the races of the earth into one all-embracing brotherhood.”
To my good friends in the Party. Those who are still wavering, I ask honestly: can you really vote for this politics of division and hate?
Can you really vote to slash workers’ rights and protections?
Can you vote to give tax avoiders a sanctuary?
Can you vote to hand over more power to the clumsy hand of the market?
Mr Speaker, what I’m about to say is not fashionable. But our country’s story of renewal through Europe is a story of immigration. We grew as a nation because of free movement.
European migrants are not “citizens of nowhere” or “queue jumpers” as the Prime Minister would have us believe. Young, energetic, diverse and willing to pay taxes, EU citizens have given so much. They have done the jobs that our own would not do.
Around 3.8 million now live in Britain. Over their lifetimes, they pay in £78,000 more than they take out. But the contribution of European migrants has not only been financial. Our culture, our art, our music, and our food has been permanently improved.
Theresa May’s deal has emerged as a Frankenstein’s monster An ugly beast that no one voted for or wanted.
To appease hardliners, the transition period can at most be extended to 2022. This has eradicated our leverage – it is simply not enough time to negotiate a free trade deal. We are now on course for another cliff edge.
This deal does not Take Back Control, it gives it away. It surrenders our voting rights in the European Council, Commission and Parliament. For nothing in return. I cannot vote for any form of Brexit because every form of Brexit is worse for my constituents.
Mr Speaker, Brexit is a historic mistake.
It forgets the lessons of Britain’s past.
It forgets the value of immigrants.
It forgets that we cannot build a new Empire by force.
It forgets that in the modern world our nation will not flourish through isolation. But connection, cooperation and a new vision for the common good.
Brexit forgets why this continent came together, after two bloody wars.
Mr Speaker, this country is crying out for a second a chance. Seven hundred thousand marched on the streets of London. Millions more campaigned online and wrote to their MPs. They are all asking for one thing: an opportunity to right the wrong of 2016. Another shot at the imperfect but audacious European dream.
Or as Shakespeare put it in Richard the 2nd, from John of Gaunt:
“That England, that was wont to conquer others, hath made a shameful conquest of itself.”
-
Any chance of a tl;dr?
-
I cannot put into words how f**king repulsive this man is.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46847169
He's openly doing two things here.
1) Saying the democratic process should be shelved because it might encourage gobshites like Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.
2) Actively encouraging gobshites like that and telling them they would be right to get out on the streets and swing punches.
Grayling is a Kitson of the first order. How in God's name did we end up with people like him in a position of power?
-
He’s another one who is just thick. He’s on the list with Gove and Javid of politicians I can’t stand.
As for the position we are in, the government is tangled up in a web of infinite bullshit. The more they wriggle the more they start to suffocate.
-
Just to prove you both right. In a committee hearing on Monday, Grayling was asked what the 'unforseen event' was that he had used to justify his awarded of the ferry contract to Seaborne Freight ferry under emergency powers, when the government have supposedly been planning for No Deal for 16 months?
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry
-
Just to prove you both right. In a committee hearing on Monday, Grayling was asked what the 'unforseen event' was that he had used to justify his awarded of the ferry contract to Seaborne Freight ferry under emergency powers, when the government have supposedly been planning for No Deal for 16 months?
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry
The tone and body language of the MP asking the question was superb. She was sat there knowing she had him bang to rights and that he was going to make himself look an absolute clown and she was loving it.
-
Just to prove you both right. In a committee hearing on Monday, Grayling was asked what the 'unforseen event' was that he had used to justify his awarded of the ferry contract to Seaborne Freight ferry under emergency powers, when the government have supposedly been planning for No Deal for 16 months?
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry
I'm sure I've seen that somewhere before...!
-
Just to prove you both right. In a committee hearing on Monday, Grayling was asked what the 'unforseen event' was that he had used to justify his awarded of the ferry contract to Seaborne Freight ferry under emergency powers, when the government have supposedly been planning for No Deal for 16 months?
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry
The tone and body language of the MP asking the question was superb. She was sat there knowing she had him bang to rights and that he was going to make himself look an absolute clown and she was loving it.
She’s a QC, they know how to make people squirm
-
David Lammy MP said the following to Parliament. If only a lot more of our politicians, (on all sides), were as true to their principles for the benefit of their constituents......
Mr Speaker, the European Union was once just a remarkable dream.
A hope that our countries which fought and murdered each other, on an industrial scale twice in one century, could come together. A refusal to return to extreme nationalism. And a determination to prevent more bloody conflicts where tens of millions are killed.
The audacious idea of European Integration was motivated by fear. But it was made possible by shared ideals: democracy, human rights, equality, freedom, and a refusal to submit to the tyranny of fascism, ever again.
After the Second World War, in 1946, Winston Churchill said this:
“If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to” its “happiness,” “prosperity and glory.”
But today some Conservative colleagues talk about “total independence” from Europe as though it is a virtue. Let me remind them, Churchill understood the European dream is to build a whole bigger than the sum of its parts. He understood that it is about pooling sovereignty. Working together. Sharing Control.
Let us now be honest with the country. Total independence is a fantasy.It is the same idea that motivates an angry teenager to run away from their family. Total independence means throwing a tantrum and ending up in the cold. Total independence is selfishness. It is individualism, arrogance, superiority, a refusal to work together, and the break-down of the common good. Total independence will not solve our problems.
Total independence will lead to total isolation.
And let us be honest. Britain did not become Great in total isolation. Britain thrived by becoming the biggest Treaty-Signing power in the world. Britain thrived by signing more than 14,000 treaties in the modern age. We thrived by sharing our sovereignty, not by stockpiling it.
Our NATO membership compels us to deploy soldiers when our fellow members are attacked. The Paris Climate Accord is an agreement that demonstrates how we tackle global threats together, not alone. Even our membership of the WTO commits the UK to supra-national regulation and arbitration of its own.
Mr Speaker, Sovereignty is not an asset to be hoarded. It is a resource which only has value when it is spent.
The hard Brexiteers in this house say they want to Take Back Control. They say that we lost it because of the European Union. But in reality they are still mourning Suez. Britain’s last fling of the Colonial dice. Back then Anthony Eden failed to recognise that Britain was no longer capable of launching a solo imperial adventure. Let us not fall for the same hubris today.
When those on the other side of this debate say they want Empire 2.0. Let us ask, what does that mean? What was imperialism?What was colonialism? Let us not forget this today.
At its worst, the British Empire was exploitation and subjugation. Moral superiority that led to putting humans in shackles. The oppression of black and brown people because this country thought it knew best. Those countries once coloured pink on the globe were not won in negotiations, they were taken by force.
Today we need to build a new image of Britain. One that brings this country together after years of division. We have to use our imagination. Empire 2.0 is not it.
After the global embarrassment of Suez, Britain became the sick man of Europe. The EEC was set up in 1958, but Britain did not join until 1973.
In those years, GDP per head rose 95 per cent in France, Italy and West Germany. Britain only grew at half this rate. Our industry and economy had fallen behind.
Mr Speaker, Europe gave post-imperial Britain a chance to regain some wealth and dignity. In the 40 years since, our economy grew faster than France, Germany and Italy. We restored our position on the global stage. But it was not only our prosperity that increased.
Our allies in the US respected us for our seat at the top table of Europe.And the rest of the world saw us become a confident nation again.
A grown up country, prepared to give and take for the greater good.
The Brexiteer promise to Take Back Control in 2016 was nothing more than a deluded fantasy. A lie that divided friends and families. A lie that pandered to racism and xenophobia. And a lie that caused an extra six hundred and thirty eight Hate Crimes per month.
What does it say about the United Kingdom when the UN sends rapporteurs to warn us of increased racism in our country? What does it say about Britain when our politicians play on the fear of migrants, races and religions, to win votes? What did it say when Nigel Farage stood in front of a Nazi-inspired poster of refugees, with the caption “breaking point”?
The founder of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, spoke of socialism’s “promise of freedom”. Its “larger hope for humanity”. And of “binding the races of the earth into one all-embracing brotherhood.”
To my good friends in the Party. Those who are still wavering, I ask honestly: can you really vote for this politics of division and hate?
Can you really vote to slash workers’ rights and protections?
Can you vote to give tax avoiders a sanctuary?
Can you vote to hand over more power to the clumsy hand of the market?
Mr Speaker, what I’m about to say is not fashionable. But our country’s story of renewal through Europe is a story of immigration. We grew as a nation because of free movement.
European migrants are not “citizens of nowhere” or “queue jumpers” as the Prime Minister would have us believe. Young, energetic, diverse and willing to pay taxes, EU citizens have given so much. They have done the jobs that our own would not do.
Around 3.8 million now live in Britain. Over their lifetimes, they pay in £78,000 more than they take out. But the contribution of European migrants has not only been financial. Our culture, our art, our music, and our food has been permanently improved.
Theresa May’s deal has emerged as a Frankenstein’s monster An ugly beast that no one voted for or wanted.
To appease hardliners, the transition period can at most be extended to 2022. This has eradicated our leverage – it is simply not enough time to negotiate a free trade deal. We are now on course for another cliff edge.
This deal does not Take Back Control, it gives it away. It surrenders our voting rights in the European Council, Commission and Parliament. For nothing in return. I cannot vote for any form of Brexit because every form of Brexit is worse for my constituents.
Mr Speaker, Brexit is a historic mistake.
It forgets the lessons of Britain’s past.
It forgets the value of immigrants.
It forgets that we cannot build a new Empire by force.
It forgets that in the modern world our nation will not flourish through isolation. But connection, cooperation and a new vision for the common good.
Brexit forgets why this continent came together, after two bloody wars.
Mr Speaker, this country is crying out for a second a chance. Seven hundred thousand marched on the streets of London. Millions more campaigned online and wrote to their MPs. They are all asking for one thing: an opportunity to right the wrong of 2016. Another shot at the imperfect but audacious European dream.
Or as Shakespeare put it in Richard the 2nd, from John of Gaunt:
“That England, that was wont to conquer others, hath made a shameful conquest of itself.”
That's one great speech, thanks NNK, he nailed it.
-
Remember through all of this that in our system PARLIAMENT is sovereign. MPs, in particular through the select committee process, have the right and in fact, the DUTY to hold Govt ministers to account.
Cherry there was asking PRECISELY the sort of question that a Select Committee member should ask of a minister. The minister's attitude, body language and words showed that he had nothing but contempt for her. Which means he has contempt for the democratic process.
I've never seen this kind of brazen behaviour before. We've normalised ministers lying and we've normalised ministers contemptuously ignoring MPs holding them to account.
-
What they know Filo, is how to Marshall facts into an argument. How to sniff out bullshitters and liars. How to lead them into the trap of their own making.
It's just the application of logic. We need more people like that in public life and fewer of the glib, flash duckers and divers like RM and Johnson and Gove and Grayling and Javid.
-
What they know Filo, is how to Marshall facts into an argument. How to sniff out bullshitters and liars. How to lead them into the trap of their own making.
It's just the application of logic. We need more people like that in public life and fewer of the glib, flash duckers and divers like RM and Johnson and Gove and Grayling and Javid.
We need more people in parliament of the quality of Diane Abbot! Ha ha.
-
Excellent contribution as usual AL.
-
Talking of full-on, balls-up shameless lying.
Headline here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6435545/amp/British-people-Mays-Brexit-deal-exclusive-poll-finds.html?__twitter_impression=true
Q7 here: https://t.co/jClBBlc4Ye?amp=1
How the f**k do these bas**rds sleep at night?
-
Then there's this in that Mail article.
"In a political version of rock, paper, scissors, when asked to choose between Mrs May’s deal and ‘no deal’, voters choose the latter.
Asked to pick between her deal and Remain they opt for Remain. When asked to choose between ‘no deal’ and Remain, Remain wins."
Imagine playing Rock Paper Scissors with that Mail journalist.
Rock blunt scissors.
Paper wraps rock.
Paper blunts scissors.
-
Then there's this in that Mail article.
"In a political version of rock, paper, scissors, when asked to choose between Mrs May’s deal and ‘no deal’, voters choose the latter.
Asked to pick between her deal and Remain they opt for Remain. When asked to choose between ‘no deal’ and Remain, Remain wins."
Imagine playing Rock Paper Scissors with that Mail journalist.
Rock blunt scissors.
Paper wraps rock.
Paper blunts scissors.
The Daily Mail
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
Reasoning: Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Some Fake News
Country: United Kingdom
World Press Freedom Rank: UK 40/180
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/
-
Mrs May has said there is more chance of Brexit not going ahead than a no deal scenario. What happened to “no deal is better than a bad deal”? Why was “no Brexit is better than a bad deal” never touted by her?
-
I suspect she's learning parliament can block no deal which gives her a problem. In some ways Corbyn is correct, a majority government with strength would provide a better solution. Thing is I doubt any party can get one.
-
She would have done last year if she'd been capable of forming coherent sentences in public.
-
''Theresa May's Brexit deal unlikely to pass, says Liam Fox''
Nothing gets passed Mr Fox does it?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/14/theresa-mays-brexit-deal-unlikely-to-pass-says-liam-fox
-
The incompetence of May's premiership continues to amaze me.
May has always said that, despite the closeness of the 2016 result, we have to respect the Will of the People.
Today, she's giving a speech where she compares the 2016 vote to the vote in 1998 to set up a Welsh Assembly.
Her speech has been pre-released to the Press. In it, she will say that, even though the 1998 referendum vote to set up a Welsh Assembly was very close, it was “accepted by both sides” and the “popular legitimacy of that institution has never seriously been questioned”.
Yeah well.
When the Bill to set up the Welsh Assembly was brought to Parliament, 144 Tory MPs voted against it.
Go on. Have a wild guess as to who one of those 144 was.
That's right. Theresa May MP.
Absolutely f**king useless. She can't even check facts about her own past before opening her trap and pouring out today's bullshit.
-
Mind, while we're talking about Brexit-supporters not being very good on simple things like facts, here's another one showing his ignorance.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1084407160304472064
-
The incompetence of May's premiership continues to amaze me.
May has always said that, despite the closeness of the 2016 result, we have to respect the Will of the People.
Today, she's giving a speech where she compares the 2016 vote to the vote in 1998 to set up a Welsh Assembly.
Her speech has been pre-released to the Press. In it, she will say that, even though the 1998 referendum vote to set up a Welsh Assembly was very close, it was “accepted by both sides” and the “popular legitimacy of that institution has never seriously been questioned”.
Yeah well.
When the Bill to set up the Welsh Assembly was brought to Parliament, 144 Tory MPs voted against it.
Go on. Have a wild guess as to who one of those 144 was.
That's right. Theresa May MP.
Absolutely f**king useless. She can't even check facts about her own past before opening her trap and pouring out today's bullshit.
I saw a thread on twitter this morning showing quite a few leading Brexiteers voted against that.
-
The hypocrisy is bad enough.
But in some ways, the lack of competence in fact checking is even worse. How are you supposed to be trusted to gather evidence on complex issues and come to logical confusions about policy if you can't even be arsed to check your own previous behaviour?
Or, she knew exactly what she had done in 98 and decided to ignore it and hoodwink people, assuming no-one would check.
Either way, it's staggering incompetence.
-
Well whaddya know?
She's cut that bit from here speech.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-wales-politics-46863044
-
... and she warns about not respecting the will of the British people and (I know - I cant stop saying this) I want someone interviewing her asking why the 1976 vote was not "respected" by (mostly) those in her Party ?
10 times the Majority as I have said for "Remain" in 76 than voted "Leave" in 2016 - so Maybot Fox Grayling and all you other fact twisting g**s - whats the difference ?????
OK times moved on as I conceded many times - we live in a changed EU - but the facts are the facts
Personally I hope she gets heavily defeated 350 250 will do (and a few abstaining) - then gets nowt from the EU - then gets a second hammering - then resigns ! I would love to shout "have you delivered strong and stable Govt ex Prime Minister" and "have you delivered on the will of the People ex Prime Minister"
Sorry I am still feeling (lets say) Ratty after Wycombe
-
Excellent contribution as usual AL.
Many thanks.:-)
-
Sorry I am still feeling (lets say) Ratty after Wycombe
You can't blame May for Wycombe, Wolfie!
-
Sorry I am still feeling (lets say) Ratty after Wycombe
You can't blame May for Wycombe, Wolfie!
I know someone who might.
-
Mrs May has said there is more chance of Brexit not going ahead than a no deal scenario. What happened to “no deal is better than a bad deal”? Why was “no Brexit is better than a bad deal” never touted by her?
Her last throw of the dice trying to get more support for her deal tomorrow. The brexiteers' own attempt at a Project Fear.
-
I like how she said 'Vote for my deal for the good of the British people.'
When she actually meant 'Vote for my deal to save my career and my place in the history books.'
-
I think she has that place in the history books sewn up at least. Just not for the reasons she'd like.
-
Oh aye. There'll be entire history books written about her and her immediate predecessor.
Can you imagine in 100 years time. Kids reading about 2010-18?
"So you're saying they actively CHOSE to adopt an economic strategy that everyone KNEW went against every principle of economics? And it made the country far poorer? And as a result, a far-right gobshite became very popular, telling folk it was all the fault of foreigners. And because the main stream politicians didn't know how to handle him, the entire country was f**ked.
"But dad. But dad. SURELY they'd read their history books about Germany in the 1930s? Surely, a country that was so obsessed with the Nazis and the War knew enough about them not to make the same f**king stupid mistakes that they had made?"
-
So, May has said tonight that a second referendum would be a "subversion of democracy".
f**king bizarre if you ask me. How a democratic vote could subvert democracy.
-
You want to know how authoritarianism starts?
This is how authoritarianism starts.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1084856282937548800
Read that carefully.
Milliband is 100% correct. In our system of governence, the Govt is answerable to MPs in Parliament. MPs are answerable to the people through elections.
Look at what May is doing here. She's saying that she, as the Head of Govt, is answerable to the People. .
What she's doing here is what EVERY demagogue who seizes power does. She's saying that Parliament is an obstruction that should be swept away. She's saying that SHE knows what the people want and Parliament doesn't. She's saying that she has a sacred duty to implement (her interpretation of) what the people want.
If she wasn't an incompetent f**kwit, this would be a very dangerous moment.
But remember this. You have never in your entire lives before today heard a British PM publicly claim that they should be a demagogue. You have today.
Very troubling times.
-
Government of the privileged, by the privileged, for the privileged. I think I got it right.
-
I think she has that place in the history books sewn up at least. Just not for the reasons she'd like.
So has Cameron
-
Find me a pm who has a place In history that's positive? Quite an interesting point when you think about it.
It'll be a fascinating day that's for sure.
-
Clem Atlee? Churchill? Harold Macmillan? Thatcher to her supporters. Harold Wilson, brilliantly holding together the centripetal forces in the Labour party for a decade (and it disintegrated within 5 years of his retirement).
The point is though that it's a finely calibrated scale. It's not a binary Great/Shite assessment. There are PMs who, whatever your opinion on their politics, directed the agenda and changed the direction of the country. Atlee and Thatcher are two perfect examples.
There are PMs who get buffeted by events outside their direct control. Major over Black Wednesday and the start of the Tory civil war over Europe. Brown over the Great Financial Crash.
Then there are PMs who made catastrophically shocking errors and lost control. Since the War, that's only really happened three times, through a PM's choice of policy. Eden over Suez, Cameron over Austerity and Brexit and May, for over playing her hand on Brexit and then f**king it up in the 2017 GE through her own spectacularly awful performance. Those are the three that the history books will have at the bottom of any list of post-War PMs. All the others have redeeming features.
-
Talking about how shockingly bad May is, THIS is her Plan B when she's battered tonight.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1085075981893799937
Any PM in history would resign after the defeat she is going to endure tonight. Not May. She wants this amendment passed so she can go back to the EU and say, "You know that safety net on the Irish border? The one I agreed had to have no end date because if it has an end date then by definition it's not a safety net, duh! Well...errr...it's like this. I want an end date to it. And yeah, I know you have said, time and again that you won't do that. But I've only got two options. Ask again. Or resign. And yes, I appreciate that I'm utterly embarrassing and humiliating our great country through my abject incompetence."
-
Clem Atlee? Churchill? Harold Macmillan? Thatcher to her supporters. Harold Wilson, brilliantly holding together the centripetal forces in the Labour party for a decade (and it disintegrated within 5 years of his retirement).
The point is though that it's a finely calibrated scale. It's not a binary Great/Shite assessment. There are PMs who, whatever your opinion on their politics, directed the agenda and changed the direction of the country. Atlee and Thatcher are two perfect examples.
There are PMs who get buffeted by events outside their direct control. Major over Black Wednesday and the start of the Tory civil war over Europe. Brown over the Great Financial Crash.
Then there are PMs who made catastrophically shocking errors and lost control. Since the War, that's only really happened three times, through a PM's choice of policy. Eden over Suez, Cameron over Austerity and Brexit and May, for over playing her hand on Brexit and then f**king it up in the 2017 GE through her own spectacularly awful performance. Those are the three that the history books will have at the bottom of any list of post-War PMs. All the others have redeeming features.
You can add Tony Bliar to that list
-
From recollection Blair never lost control of the house. And the errors he made with the wars in iraq and afghanistan were backed a majority of MPs.
-
To be fair Iraq will forever blight Blair. That's undoubtedly what he's gone down in history for. I'm the first to be critical of him, even though his government did oversee a long period of massive prosperity that I was lucky enough to grow up in. What has May's government actually done? What's a positive change they've made for British society? Even Cameron, who'll also go down as a disaster, can say his government legalised gay marriage. May's government has stumbled from shambles to shambles for over 2 years.
-
It pissed me off when Churchill won the greatest Briton ever thingy on the BBC and Attlee was nowhere to be seen.
Attlee was right there with Winston throughout the war and then delivered the greatest series of reforms ever in the post war government, while at the same time keeping together the warring factions within the Labour party eg Bevan,Bevin and Morrison for nigh on 20 years
IMO (and others more knowledgeable than me) the greatest PM ever.
-
I'm no fan of Blair's (I left the Labour party because of him) but anyone who compares his control of the political agenda with that of Cameron, May and Eden, knows the square root of f**k all about politics.
-
Tommy
You've got to be careful here.
There are right wingers who immortalise Thatcher and ignore the fact that she failed badly at the end of her term and became a liability.
Labour supporters tend to do the same with Attlee. Yes, he put the country onto another path (a much better one in my opinion, but that's just my opinion). But within 5 years he'd lost his massive majority, and within another year he was in opposition.
Churchill stands above everyone else because he was the person that defined what was required to galvanise the country in the most dangerous moments of our history. Yes Attlee was in the coalition cabinet, and yes it was a collective effort of Govt during the War. But Churchill transcended that and defined the spirit of the nation at a time when it might have broken. If Lord Halifax had become PM in 1940 (and he very nearly did) there would have been a very different outcome to WWII.
-
BST. Could we do with Churchill to galvanize the country now?
-
Him or Thatcher would be strong enough.
-
BB
No. That's silly. We don't need someone to stiffen our resolve against an existential threat from an implacable enemy.
We need someone to competently organise negotiations, understand the weakness of our position and Marshall the disparate opinions in Parliament.
Churchill was f**king useless at that humdrum stuff. He was the most catastrophic Chancellor of the Exchequer of the 20th century. And his administration in 51-55 was a rolling mess.
-
Him or Thatcher would be strong enough.
Wasn't Thatcher keen on Europe? :laugh:
-
BB
You really haven't got the first idea about Thatcher have you?
Thatcher's genius was in instinctively knowing the strength of her hand. That was what made her a good negotiator. She rarely ever overplayed her hand. She compromised and discussed.
Sure, she projected this image of the Iron Lady, taking no prisoners and battering opponents with her handbag. But that was just for the starry-eyed kids to lap up.
As for Churchill, aye, he was a grand negotiator. He negotiated away the whole of Eastern Europe to Stalin in 1944.
-
Thatcher pretty much came up with the idea of the Single Market. Shows how batshit the current Tory party is that the Single Market is now seen as some plot to enrich the EU at the expense of Britain.
Oh aye. Churchill was all for a United States of Europe too. He also proposed the UK and France merging as a single country. But I'm sure our friends in here know all that.
-
I guess we can wonder what any of them would have done in this situation.
Interesting when you guys mention PM's who haven't got a mark against them - not one in my lifetime, just an observation. That's pretty damning don't we think?
So we expect May's deal not to go through, then a no confidence vote is probably likely. I wonder then what happens next...
-
Bare knuckle boxing match in the Commons with Bercow as referee, obviously.
-
I wonder when was the last time the government lost a major vote on a major party policy by more than 100 votes?
-
Thatcher pretty much came up with the idea of the Single Market. Shows how batshit the current Tory party is that the Single Market is now seen as some plot to enrich the EU at the expense of Britain.
Oh aye. Churchill was all for a United States of Europe too. He also proposed the UK and France merging as a single country. But I'm sure our friends in here know all that.
Do you mean like a FUK EU merger? Just shows how far-sighted old Winnie was!
-
Tommy
You've got to be careful here.
There are right wingers who immortalise Thatcher and ignore the fact that she failed badly at the end of her term and became a liability.
Labour supporters tend to do the same with Attlee. Yes, he put the country onto another path (a much better one in my opinion, but that's just my opinion). But within 5 years he'd lost his massive majority, and within another year he was in opposition.
Churchill stands above everyone else because he was the person that defined what was required to galvanise the country in the most dangerous moments of our history. Yes Attlee was in the coalition cabinet, and yes it was a collective effort of Govt during the War. But Churchill transcended that and defined the spirit of the nation at a time when it might have broken. If Lord Halifax had become PM in 1940 (and he very nearly did) there would have been a very different outcome to WWII.
I think you are giving Churchill too much credit.
If Hitler had decided to invade Britain instead of losing half of his army in Russia then no amount of rousing speeches would have saved us.
Although the Americans would have - eventually.
-
The thinking now is that Hitler realised that he could never invade us with our navy and Air Force for protection.
He wanted us to sue for peace and let him concentrate on Russia.
-
I wonder when was the last time the government lost a major vote on a major party policy by more than 100 votes?
I'm wondering what has been the biggest losing margin a PM has ever had without having to resign afterwards.
-
Tommy
The point was that there was a strong movement, certainly in the Tory party, to do a deal with Hitler in 1940. Churchill was emblematic in showing that we weren't, at that time, prepared to deal. That was a historic moment. And he called it right. Albeit, agreed, helped by Hitler's mistakes.
But that's the point. Great politicians, at the key moments, make the right decisions.
Bad politicians make catastrophically wrong decisions. Cameron going for a referendum is a classic example. Go and look at opinion polls for the decade up to 2014-15 about what issues people thought were of vital importance to the country. The EU never came on the radar. It was simply not that big a deal to the country. It WAS a big deal to right wingers in politics, and that's the reason Cameron called the referendum. He did it to try to control his own party and to neutralise UKIP. There was no strategic reason to do so. By calling, then losing the referendum, HE, single-handedly turned the EU into the most important issue in the country. He opened up societal divisions that will take years to heal. He lost us (already...still counting) something like £100bn in lost economic output.
That was the worst political decision since Suez - arguably worse because at least there was a strategic rationale for Suez.
-
We're in weird times Glyn.
No other PM could have survived a catastrophe like the 2017 GE. No other PM would survive a party vote of confidence in which 60-odd% of her backbenchers voted against her.
The issue is that no-one else in the Tory party wants to own the Brexit process, because there's no good outcome for them. They want May to be the lightning conductor and THEN knife her when Brexit's done.
To the best of my knowledge, no PM has ever lost a vote on a major strategic policy by so much as 1 vote, and survived. But May won't resign if she loses by 200 votes tonight.
Bizarre times.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/the-most-significant-government-defeats-11607946?
-
Governments have had defeats in the Commons before; but usually on marginal issues, and usually by not very many votes, without there being any pressure for the PM to resign/go to the country just because they've lost the vote. That's what's making me wonder what the previous worst government defeat has been.
-
I think if she gets absolutely hammered in the vote she will resign.
-
Filo
Interesting list.
MacDonald and Callaghan of course ended up seeing their administration's fall after those votes.
Neville Chamberlain resigned after WINNING a vote by 81 votes after the Norway disaster in 1940, because a large number of his own party voted against him.
I'd forgotten about Cameron losing the Syria vote. In normal times, that should have been a resignation issue.
It's interesting that the dynamics in Parliament have changed. For many, many years, the ruling party had huge majorities so it was almost impossible for them to lose votes. That's very bad for democracy, as the House of Commons is supposed to act as a check on the unlimited power of the Government. We're in different times now. We regularly have small majorities (Major 92-97, Cameron/May 15-17) or coalitions/minority Govts (Wilson/Callaghan 74-79, Cameron 10-15, May 17-). In those circumstances, the HoC really does have power and can restrict the PM's authority.
-
Gaz. It's a fair bet that she'll lose by pushing 200 votes. It is astonishing that a PM could lose like that on something so important and not resign. But I'll bet you she doesn't.
-
Id go for 80 defeat - and no resigning (pure guess on the first bit - not the second)
-
Id go for 80 defeat - and no resigning (pure guess on the first bit - not the second)
Sky news are saying 200+
-
Filo
Interesting list.
MacDonald and Callaghan of course ended up seeing their administration's fall after those votes.
Neville Chamberlain resigned after WINNING a vote by 81 votes after the Norway disaster in 1940, because a large number of his own party voted against him.
I'd forgotten about Cameron losing the Syria vote. In normal times, that should have been a resignation issue.
It's interesting that the dynamics in Parliament have changed. For many, many years, the ruling party had huge majorities so it was almost impossible for them to lose votes. That's very bad for democracy, as the House of Commons is supposed to act as a check on the unlimited power of the Government. We're in different times now. We regularly have small majorities (Major 92-97, Cameron/May 15-17) or coalitions/minority Govts (Wilson/Callaghan 74-79, Cameron 10-15, May 17-). In those circumstances, the HoC really does have power and can restrict the PM's authority.
Can't quite remember, what made 2013 not normal times?
-
the even more worrying consequence of all of this (as a Labour supporter) is when Labour call a general election, even though May is universally seen as a rubbish PM, even more people don't want Corbyn as PM, so no single party will be able to continue in government with a majority. If only Corbyn would give way to a more electable leader, Labour could win a general election with a huge majority.
Very weird times.
-
Filo
Interesting list.
MacDonald and Callaghan of course ended up seeing their administration's fall after those votes.
Neville Chamberlain resigned after WINNING a vote by 81 votes after the Norway disaster in 1940, because a large number of his own party voted against him.
I'd forgotten about Cameron losing the Syria vote. In normal times, that should have been a resignation issue.
It's interesting that the dynamics in Parliament have changed. For many, many years, the ruling party had huge majorities so it was almost impossible for them to lose votes. That's very bad for democracy, as the House of Commons is supposed to act as a check on the unlimited power of the Government. We're in different times now. We regularly have small majorities (Major 92-97, Cameron/May 15-17) or coalitions/minority Govts (Wilson/Callaghan 74-79, Cameron 10-15, May 17-). In those circumstances, the HoC really does have power and can restrict the PM's authority.
Can't quite remember, what made 2013 not normal times?
It being a coalition made it a slightly abnormal time to start with - the government was defeated by votes against by both Tory and Libdem MPs.
-
the even more worrying consequence of all of this (as a Labour supporter) is when Labour call a general election, even though May is universally seen as a rubbish PM, even more people don't want Corbyn as PM, so no single party will be able to continue in government with a majority. If only Corbyn would give way to a more electable leader, Labour could win a general election with a huge majority.
Very weird times.
My thoughts exactly. I was a staunch Corbynista at the last election, but the real worry is that even with this shambles in government Labour could still not win the next one and whether people's views on Corbyn are justified or not, a more moderate leader would see them through.
-
the even more worrying consequence of all of this (as a Labour supporter) is when Labour call a general election, even though May is universally seen as a rubbish PM, even more people don't want Corbyn as PM, so no single party will be able to continue in government with a majority. If only Corbyn would give way to a more electable leader, Labour could win a general election with a huge majority.
Very weird times.
Agree with this actually. Plus Corbyn isn't going to push for what the labour people will want. I do think another Tory leader could win an election. May probablt should go but there's no replacement is there?
-
Tommy.
Been my concern on Corbyn all along. Labour aren't reaching out to enthuse large swathes of the electorate. They have 30-odd% in the polls because they are Not Tory and Not Explicitly Pro-Brexit and at present there is no other NT and NEPB alternative in England because of the LDs having collapsed.
Problem for Labour was highlighted by the poll before Xmas. If Corbyn goes into a GE saying he will see Brexit through, Labour support drops to 22% and the LDs go up to 25%.
The real situation might not pan out like that precisely but it does show how potential vulnerable Labour's current support is.
It's a simple enough issue. Labour have never won power without building a base that brings in supports from the centre as well as the Left. While ever the more aggressive Corbynistas are using "centrist" as a term of abuse,Labour will not succeed.
-
BFYP
Who though?
The Tories have an existential problem over Europe. They need a leader who is strong enough to face both wings down. But the Tory membership are overwhelmingly on the right of the party. So I can't see anyone talented enough to do that job and even if that person existed, I can't see them being chosen by the party.
-
Listening to the debate and the Brexiteer MPs seem f**king delusional and incapable of accepting anything based remotely in reality.
Sounds about right.
-
I have to say, May have a very impressive speech. If you factor out the fact that she painted herself into this corner, she gave a very good argument for why her deal would be the best outcome.
The point is that we are where we are now because SHE has spent the past year ruling out the concept of a second referendum. Had she not been so vehemently against that for reasons of buttressing her own position in the Tory party, or had Labour been better at pushing that perfectly reasonable idea, it would be less toxic now.
So, in her own terms, May made a very good case tonight. But the second referendum is still the only sensible outcome, even though it would cause all sorts of aggro.
-
BST
If a second referendum is as simple as the last one, that is Remain or Leave, and we get another Leave victory, where will we be then.
Would we be where we are now?
Would we be any further forward?
-
Hound.
I've set this out several times before.
The problem with the first one was that there was no clarity on what Leave meant. Farage was still talking about a Norway deal 6 months AFTER the referendum.
Leave, in 2016 covered a wide range of concepts.
You deal with that by having a more nuanced referendum now that we know what the possibilities of Leave are.
You have three, maybe four options.
No Deal
May's deal or a variant of that.
Perhaps a Norway type deal.
Remain.
If you have those 4 options, voters mark them 1-4 in order of preference. You add up all the 1's. If no option gets 50% of the 1’s, you eliminate the option with the least 1's. Then you re-allocate the 2's from the ballots you've eliminated. Keep going till some option gets 50%.
It's simple, fair, informed and democratic.
If any Leave option wins, I would accept that.
-
Hound.
I've set this out several times before.
The problem with the first one was that there was no clarity on what Leave meant. Farage was still talking about a Norway deal 6 months AFTER the referendum.
Leave, in 2016 covered a wide range of concepts.
You deal with that by having a more nuanced referendum now that we know what the possibilities of Leave are.
You have three, maybe four options.
No Deal
May's deal or a variant of that.
Perhaps a Norway type deal.
Remain.
If you have those 4 options, voters mark them 1-4 in order of preference. You add up all the 1's. If no option gets 50% of the 1’s, you eliminate the option with the least 1's. Then you re-allocate the 2's from the ballots you've eliminated. Keep going till some option gets 50%.
It's simple, fair, informed and democratic.
If any Leave option wins, I would accept that.
BST, yes I know what you have said before (as above) but I haven’t heard any of the politicians or journalists say the same thing.
All they talk about is a second referendum.
So that is why I asked you the question in my previous post.
I acknowledge that your knowledge of our political system is very good but I have only seen you suggest those four options.
-
Then that's a pretty shocking indictment of our media. I've seen numerous people suggest pretty much exactly what I'm saying.
-
Looks like a monumental defeat for May judging by pictures from the No lobby...
-
Actually, maybe it's an indictment of people not paying attention.
Here's an MP proposing that 7 months ago, and a newspaper reporting it.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/16/back-second-brexit-vote-says-conservative-mp-justine-greening
I'd certainly agree that MANY papers haven't reported that. You might want to consider why that is.
-
You might also want to ponder why May's Govt were so vehemently against it.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-44840154
-
230 majority against. Christ.
-
Bye bye Theresa.
-
Corbyn has tabled a motion of no confidence in the government.
-
What a shock.
-
I thought Jezza was going to have a stroke there.
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He didn’t have a choice did he? He’s had it up his sleeve for months and he has waited until the Tories are at rock bottom before he played it.
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He's got no choice, given the scale of the Government defeat and then May effective throwing down the gauntlet to him.
I think he would probably have preferred to wait until after Monday when May has to come back with "Plan B."
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He has no choice, she basically called him out and he can't carry on saying he's going to do it and then not.
Many reckon she will win it. A big loss but again you listen to her and she impresses in her speeches tonight. Why can't she be like that all the time?
He big thing is May wins tomorrow then what? I cannot see the Tories going against her really but you never know....
-
Matt Hancock dying on his arse in interview on beeb
-
2nd referendum is the only logical outcome now.
Parliament will not allow No Deal.
There is no possibility of May negotiating a re-worked deal which could turn round a vote like tonight.
Labour's no confidence vote will fail.
What other option is there from here?
-
Matt Hancock is not even close to being a third rate politician. He's f**king hopeless.
-
2nd referendum is the only logical outcome now.
Parliament will not allow No Deal.
There is no possibility of May negotiating a re-worked deal which could turn round a vote like tonight.
Labour's no confidence vote will fail.
What other option is there from here?
Take the 6/4.
-
Matt Hancock is not even close to being a third rate politician. He's f**king hopeless.
He’s another bumbling idiot. The question he kept getting asked and not answering was the easiest question he could have been asked. He should have just listed every possibility, even though they are all probably impossible to negotiate.
-
It's Jan 15th. The only practical solution now is to postpone article 50.
Get ready for a perpetual state of brexit.
-
BFYP.
Because it's not about speeches. It's about getting big strategic decisions right.
She's got every single one wrong for two and a half years.
She called A50 too soon.
She announced red lines that gave her no negotiating room.
She failed to build coalitions in Parliament.
She called and catastrophically lost a GE that she didn't need to call.
She agreed a deal that an infant could have predicted would never be accepted by Parliament.
She never accepted that in the weak position she was in, she HAD to keep options open.
Utterly f**king hopeless at every step of the way. A decent speech tonight doesn't make up for 30 months of total failure.
-
2nd referendum is the only logical outcome now.
Parliament will not allow No Deal.
There is no possibility of May negotiating a re-worked deal which could turn round a vote like tonight.
Labour's no confidence vote will fail.
What other option is there from here?
I agree. There is a big question for the Shadow Cabinet tomorrow though. When the No-Confidence vote goes down, will they accept that a GE is off the table and throw their weight behind a 2nd Referendum? Over to you, Jezza.
-
It’s very difficult to negotiate a deal if you are not willing to just walk away. You just end up getting slapped around.
-
2nd 3rd 4th we will vote till we get what we want.
-
We have to go to the EU and delay article 50.. no deal cannot happen, and cancelling article 50 and dropping brexit without a peoples vote goes against the original outcome..
Then whoever is in government has more time to sort this mess out..
Or better, IMHO, cancel brexit which we can do unilaterally and then do what we should have done before, get an exit strategy agreeable to parliament and the EU and then offer that choice to the electorate.
BST said at the top of this page what I have been saying since June 2016, the leave option was never clarified - surely folks could see that leaving the EU was never going to be as simple as jut leaving, period.??
-
I'll say again. Putin must be laughing his cock off.
We have a Govt in absolute chaos at the most vital moment in three generations.
This is precisely what he wanted to achieve when he poured money into the Leave campaign.
-
2nd 3rd 4th we will vote till we get what we want.
Don't be silly. Read what I and others have written here.
-
2nd 3rd 4th we will vote till we get what we want.
No, we actually need a vote which is clear hatbthe outcomes mean.. should have done that first but the government never thought leave would win..
-
One thing is for certain tonight. We're not leaving the EU on 29 March.
-
We have to go to the EU and delay article 50.. no deal cannot happen, and cancelling article 50 and dropping brexit without a peoples vote goes against the original outcome..
Then whoever is in government has more time to sort this mess out..
Or better, IMHO, cancel brexit which we can do unilaterally and then do what we should have done before, get an exit strategy agreeable to parliament and the EU and then offer that choice to the electorate.
BST said at the top of this page what I have been saying since June 2016, the leave option was never clarified - surely folks could see that leaving the EU was never going to be as simple as jut leaving, period.??
“Surely folks could see that leaving the EU was never going to be as simple as just leaving”
...........and yet the leave vote won.
Says lots about the electorate.
-
Probably the best thing they can do now is adopt a cross party approach to Brexit - which is what they should have done in the first place.
The referendum wasn't split between traditional party lines and neither should the negotiation with Europe. Round these parts there was a big majority voted leave in the referendum yet Doncaster is a Labour stronghold. You then end up with a Tory government negotiating on behalf of what must be many Labour voters - this seems a recipe for disaster. In effect you get the extreme right wing of the Tory party trying to drive the Brexit negotiations along their lines which must seem very unfair to labour bods. There are all sorts of groups trying to make political capital out of the situation and this tends to mask the real Brexit stuff.
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He has no choice, she basically called him out and he can't carry on saying he's going to do it and then not.
Many reckon she will win it. A big loss but again you listen to her and she impresses in her speeches tonight. Why can't she be like that all the time?
He big thing is May wins tomorrow then what? I cannot see the Tories going against her really but you never know....
When the No Confidence motion loses and there's therefore no chance of a General Election, Corbyn can then move the Labour Party on to supporting a second referendum to unblock Parliament. That's the only tangible result I can see, unless May somehow manages to lose this too!
-
In case people have missed it
that was the biggest commons defeat EVER and the first time in history more than 400 Mp's have voted against a government motion (although it was a much smaller parliament before 1900)
-
We have to go to the EU and delay article 50.. no deal cannot happen, and cancelling article 50 and dropping brexit without a peoples vote goes against the original outcome..
Then whoever is in government has more time to sort this mess out..
Or better, IMHO, cancel brexit which we can do unilaterally and then do what we should have done before, get an exit strategy agreeable to parliament and the EU and then offer that choice to the electorate.
BST said at the top of this page what I have been saying since June 2016, the leave option was never clarified - surely folks could see that leaving the EU was never going to be as simple as jut leaving, period.??
“Surely folks could see that leaving the EU was never going to be as simple as just leaving”
...........and yet the leave vote won.
Says lots about the electorate.
As does all the vox pops there's been on Radio 5 all day with wally after wally parroting 'just walk away' as if that's all there is to it.
-
2nd 3rd 4th we will vote till we get what we want.
We got what we wanted in 1976 - Country voted Remain
Majority was 33% Result (approx) 66 to Remain 33 to Leave = Maj 33%
Never respected by Tories (I agree times have changed)
We voted in 2016
Majority was 3 % (approx) Votes to Leave 52 % Votes to Remain 49% = Maj 3 %
So that was Vote One in 76 and produced 10 times more of a Majority than 2016 to actually STAY so perhaps we just need another so it will be best of 3 !
*** Oh and away Polls count double !
-
In case people have missed it
that was the biggest commons defeat EVER and the first time in history more than 400 Mp's have voted against a government motion (although it was a much smaller parliament before 1900)
Erm...between 1884 to the end of World War One there were 670 MPs. Twenty more than there is now. Then from 1918 to 1922 there were 707.
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He has no choice, she basically called him out and he can't carry on saying he's going to do it and then not.
Many reckon she will win it. A big loss but again you listen to her and she impresses in her speeches tonight. Why can't she be like that all the time?
He big thing is May wins tomorrow then what? I cannot see the Tories going against her really but you never know....
When the No Confidence motion loses and there's therefore no chance of a General Election, Corbyn can then move the Labour Party on to supporting a second referendum to unblock Parliament. That's the only tangible result I can see, unless May somehow manages to lose this too!
She will win the No Confidence vote because the DUP will support her - BUT where the hell do we go after that
Cheers Cameron - Clown of the highest order.
-
After tomorrow's sideshow, May has only got two days to come up with something else to put in front of Parliament that's different to the deal that's been voted down. That's the next important milestone, not tomorrow's vote.
-
After tonight's vote the EU seem to be saying the door is closed there is nothing to discuss.
If this really is their position then there is nowhere to go except No Deal or a second referendum.
There aren't any other options and if No Deal isn't an option then.....
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He has no choice, she basically called him out and he can't carry on saying he's going to do it and then not.
Many reckon she will win it. A big loss but again you listen to her and she impresses in her speeches tonight. Why can't she be like that all the time?
He big thing is May wins tomorrow then what? I cannot see the Tories going against her really but you never know....
When the No Confidence motion loses and there's therefore no chance of a General Election, Corbyn can then move the Labour Party on to supporting a second referendum to unblock Parliament. That's the only tangible result I can see, unless May somehow manages to lose this too!
Aye. Corbyn CAN. But he'll have to do it through gritted teeth. If we go for a second referendum, that'll be one of his lifetime ambitions slipping through his fingers.
-
After tonight's vote the EU seem to be saying the door is closed there is nothing to discuss.
If this really is their position then there is nowhere to go except No Deal or a second referendum.
There aren't any other options and if No Deal isn't an option then.....
Well aye.
And it will cause a very, very unpleasant and divisive atmosphere in the country. Because we haven't had leaders sufficiently statesman-like to see that we were inevitably going to end up here, and to start preparing the population for it.
Instead we've had Kitsons like Grayling justifying far-right violence in the case of a second referendum.
-
After tonight's vote the EU seem to be saying the door is closed there is nothing to discuss.
If this really is their position then there is nowhere to go except No Deal or a second referendum.
There aren't any other options and if No Deal isn't an option then.....
I have my Pen poised to place my "X" already
I will get a third chance to vote the right way
76 Leave (I lost)
16 Remain (I lost)
2019 ?
-
After tonight's vote the EU seem to be saying the door is closed there is nothing to discuss.
If this really is their position then there is nowhere to go except No Deal or a second referendum.
There aren't any other options and if No Deal isn't an option then.....
I have my Pen poised to place my "X" already
I will get a third chance to vote the right way
76 Leave (I lost)
16 Remain (I lost)
2019 ?
Will you be confused though mate when there will be more than two options to vote for?
-
Given Sinn Fein do not take their 7 seats, the Speaker and 3 deputies do not vote, 2 of which are Labour MPs and 1 of which is a Conservative. 320 will be enough to secure tomorrow's vote either way. If the Labour MP who is pregnant and has been recommended an immediate cesarian does not cast her vote tomorrow for obvious reasons then it becomes 319 and so forth.
If every sitting Tory legible to vote and the DUP's 10 MPs vote for the Government then they have 326.
However the 117 that voted against Theresa May was much higher than expected and whilst the vast majority will be expected to back her, it would only take a minimum of 7 Tory rebels to bring down this Government. I think the odds of that are very slim, but it's not a foregone conclusion like many are suggesting, what a Tory says they will do and what they actually do is a different matter.
-
She was expecting earlier on to be brought back to the House of Commons tomorrow by her husband, so I think she will be voting.
-
So what has changed?
The May deal is as dead as a dodo with such a heavy reverse.
No deal as default was ruled out by May tonight, and does not have the numbers in the HoC.
May is safe from another confidence vote from her party for a full year. She is too thick skinned to resign.
So what are the options for ConReb, stick with May through thin and thinner, or move her on!
She should survive the VoC, but with a diminished position. The DUP have her over a barrel, and will play her to the max.
Will there be cabinet resignations, and will many Tory MP's will abstain to avoid directly opposing the government?
Even if there were to be a majority in favour of Ref2 (there is not at the moment), then a viable option would need to be agreed to stand against the remain status quo. So the indicative vote comes into play.
May would still need to offer Ref2 though, seek to agree a delay to Article 50, and set up Ref2 in 6 months time.
The big data exploiters in the original Leave Ref must be licking their lips at the business opportunity.
-
Would Corbyn have called the no confidence vote if he didn't think he had the votes?
He has no choice, she basically called him out and he can't carry on saying he's going to do it and then not.
Many reckon she will win it. A big loss but again you listen to her and she impresses in her speeches tonight. Why can't she be like that all the time?
He big thing is May wins tomorrow then what? I cannot see the Tories going against her really but you never know....
When the No Confidence motion loses and there's therefore no chance of a General Election, Corbyn can then move the Labour Party on to supporting a second referendum to unblock Parliament. That's the only tangible result I can see, unless May somehow manages to lose this too!
Aye. Corbyn CAN. But he'll have to do it through gritted teeth. If we go for a second referendum, that'll be one of his lifetime ambitions slipping through his fingers.
But the Conference voted for it, he can't ignore them. Aye, it'll be through gritted teeth but if he betrays his own membership he's as finished as May.
-
This thread.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1085286045523107842
-
Albie
If so much as one Minister abstains tomorrow, I'll buy you half a dozen pints before the match on Saturday.
Barring enforced absences, I'd be astonished if any Tory MP doesn't vote for her.
The whole VoNC thing is utterly pointless, although it does give May the chance to get back in the saddle with a quick win after today's disaster.
As I've said before, you do begin to wonder whether Corbyn is a hostile agent.
-
What choice did Corbyn have? They'd ramped up the narrative, Starmer more than anyone to a point that May had effectively said let's do it then. He had to do it or she opened the door for someone else to and him look weak. Granted I expect she knew his plan anyway.....
I saw the Peston thread before and my thoughts are unchanged, there is no winner from this really.
With the eu clearly not wanting to budge it's all a bit stalemate.
My personal opinion is that Brexit shouldn't be abandoned because a deal cannot be agreed.
-
BST.
That's a bit churlish. All the opposition have been crowing for Corbyn to call a vote of no confidence for weeks. Now that he does he's accused of it being a pointless exercise. He had to call it now even if he knew it would not succeed. Which it won't.
-
Albie
If so much as one Minister abstains tomorrow, I'll buy you half a dozen pints before the match on Saturday.
Barring enforced absences, I'd be astonished if any Tory MP doesn't vote for her.
The whole VoNC thing is utterly pointless, although it does give May the chance to get back in the saddle with a quick win after today's disaster.
As I've said before, you do begin to wonder whether Corbyn is a hostile agent.
How terrible, a Labour leader following Labour conference policy.... if only he had done the decent thing and lost the 2017 GE by a huge majority and let Teresa May carry out her original hard Brexit. At least you and Stephen Kinnock would be happy.
-
Aaaand once again Wilts goes into "if you criticise Corbyn, you're a Blairite" mode. Didn't take long.
I was out canvassing for a Corbyn Govt all day in election day in June 2017. Were you?
I whooped so hard I nearly crashed the car on the way home that night when we heard the exit poll.
Grow up.
-
Tommy/Wilts.
Conference policy was NOT to call a VoNC. It was to do all possible to secure a GE.
It's patently obvious that the VoNC will be lost tomorrow, so it was stupid to call it.
A sensible approach would have been to say, "We WANT the Govt to be brought down, but we accept there is no mechanism by which that can happen. So we move onto the pressing issue of trying to sort out May's clusterf**k".
Instead, we'll have a pointless vote which will result in the DUP and ERG corralling around May.
-
By normal precedents, a defeat of 232 votes on a minority Government's flagship policy would see the Prime Minister resigning before the night is over. But we live in unprecedented times.
But it the Leader of The Opposition cannot table a Vote of No Confidence when a minority Government loses by such a staggering margin then when can he?
-
BST,
I did not say Ministers would abstain.
Some Tory backbenchers might, but not in significant numbers.
By next week, I would expect Cabinet Ministers to take a view on whether they are best placed on the inside, or on the outside.
They will do so on the basis of their own career prospects.
The VoC is not pointless, even if it is lost.
It puts pressure on the Tory members to clarify their position, and offer their voters a view on whether they think the party interest is more important than the national interest.
As Wilts says, Corbyn is following the policy set out at Conference to seek an early GE, and supported by Starmer.
The VoC is a step in that process. Had he not done so, there would have been criticised for a missed opportunity.
Please don't add your own propaganda to posts that you either have not read properly, or choose to misinterpret. Your obsessive dislike of Corbyn is starting to look slightly unhinged.
-
By normal precedents, a defeat of 232 votes on a minority Government's flagship policy would see the Prime Minister resigning before the night is over. But we live in unprecedented times.
But it the Leader of The Opposition cannot table a Vote of No Confidence when a minority Government loses by such a staggering margin then when can he?
Take your point but likely another day wasted for effectively nothing.....
-
On election day I was with the future Mrs Wilts Rover at her eldests wedding in Peckham. They were at the reception whilst I watched the tv back at the hotel in amazement. We bumped in Harriet Harmon and asked her how she thought they would do. 'I think it will be close she said'. She got a majority of 37 000.
I did campaign in Bristol North the previous week though, which was one of the seats Labour took.
Anything else you want to know?
Now justify your attack on the Labour leader for following Labour policy?
-
By normal precedents, a defeat of 232 votes on a minority Government's flagship policy would see the Prime Minister resigning before the night is over. But we live in unprecedented times.
But it the Leader of The Opposition cannot table a Vote of No Confidence when a minority Government loses by such a staggering margin then when can he?
Take your point but likely another day wasted for effectively nothing.....
May isn't going to report back to Parliament on what she will do next until Monday - so we have actually got 5 wasted days (so far).
Of course even if she looses the vote tomorrow she doesn't have to step down. She has 14 days to see if she can regain the confidence of the house.
-
Wilts
As I said, party policy was not explicitly to call a VoC. Only the most foolish of politicians call votes that they can't win. Doing so when your opponent is on the ropes is the equivalent of a boxer allowing his opponent's corner to get the smelling salts out for their man. It achieves nothing other than to reinforce May's position.
-
Albie. Like many Corbynistas, you seem unable to differentiate between people WANTING Corbyn to win, and people having genuine concerns about whether he can. It's a bit of an epidemic these days.
-
By normal precedents, a defeat of 232 votes on a minority Government's flagship policy would see the Prime Minister resigning before the night is over. But we live in unprecedented times.
But it the Leader of The Opposition cannot table a Vote of No Confidence when a minority Government loses by such a staggering margin then when can he?
Take your point but likely another day wasted for effectively nothing.....
May isn't going to report back to Parliament on what she will do next until Monday - so we have actually got 5 wasted days (so far).
Of course even if she looses the vote tomorrow she doesn't have to step down. She has 14 days to see if she can regain the confidence of the house.
Which is crucial. Some Tory MPs may look to vote against their own party to then try and secure guarantees from May before voting for her in a confidence motion within 14 days. A couple may abstain for that reason as well.
Some may vote against her knowing even she isn't as thick skinned to fight another election and they cannot topple her until December this year at the earliest.
Because it's already a hung parliament and the DUP only give her a working majority of 7 it really isn't as pointless as some would suggest, I think the margin of victory will be by 1 or 2 votes.
-
If the ERG really want - and have the balls - to get rid of May, they only have to tell her in private they'll abstain tomorrow. That would force May to contemplate the decision of resigning herself or being forced to have a General Election that she (and her party) has a good chance of losing. I can't see that happening though :lol:
-
ERG want to keep her in place, Glyn, as a blame sponge.
As Mr Croft says, if May survives the VoC with just a thin sliver of votes, her position going into multi party discussion to seek a majority is weakened.
Treeza needs to cut a new deal at the time she has least negotiating traction. The EU can't pull a rabbit out of the hat for her, and why should they?
Nothing to offer, unless she makes concessions that will alienate her own support base.
No-one is going to follow her regardless, after the shambles today, apart from the DUP who will milk it dry.
I think she will try to press time by returning with the same deal tweaked. The Speaker may refuse her permission on the basis of no substantive change.
Thats all she has....unless she realigns around an amendment which goes against everything she has been saying from the get go.
-
I think the more likely outcome is that the whole process is effectively taken out of her hands. The thought of her being allowed, on behalf of the country, to go back to the EU to ask them for changes which might be sufficient to turn round a vote like this is simply bizarre. I'm genuinely concerned that she has something approaching a mental health problem if she really thinks that is remotely possible. The word from Cabinet leaks is that she has been becoming more and more secretive - none of them have been given any indication of what Plan B is, which is one reason that Hancock floundered earlier (the other being that he is f**king hopeless).
There were rumours last week of the Chairs of the Select Committees forming an ad hoc Brexit Executive Committee, taking over the entire process on behalf of MPs and thrashing out a way forward that would have a chance of getting a majority in the House. Effectively by-passing the PM. It's unprecedented, but the unprecedented seems to be standard at the moment.
-
. The word from ,,................ - none of them have been given any indication of what Plan B is, which is one reason that Hancock floundered earlier (the other being that he is f**king hopeless).
.... amen to that. They have lost so many "good" (and I use the word in its loosest form !!!) people to this issue that there are too many people like Hancock and the bloke in charge of NHS (name escapes me) - and GRAYLING - simply out of their depth !!!
Lightweights the lot of them - while the Country does like Hancock and flounders around - wanting leadership. In all my days I have never seen such a mess - and in fact an entirely avoidable and self inflicted mess
-
I think the more likely outcome is that the whole process is effectively taken out of her hands. The thought of her being allowed, on behalf of the country, to go back to the EU to ask them for changes which might be sufficient to turn round a vote like this is simply bizarre. I'm genuinely concerned that she has something approaching a mental health problem if she really thinks that is remotely possible. The word from Cabinet leaks is that she has been becoming more and more secretive - none of them have been given any indication of what Plan B is, which is one reason that Hancock floundered earlier (the other being that he is f**king hopeless).
There were rumours last week of the Chairs of the Select Committees forming an ad hoc Brexit Executive Committee, taking over the entire process on behalf of MPs and thrashing out a way forward that would have a chance of getting a majority in the House. Effectively by-passing the PM. It's unprecedented, but the unprecedented seems to be standard at the moment.
This ad hoc Brexit committee, is it something like I was suggesting a few weeks ago.
-
.... and back on one of 2 horses - I had to laugh at the "sneer" by May at the Lib Dems. They stood in the last General Election on a "Second Referendum - with a view to keeping us in the EU" and what happened ? They got ONLY 7% of the people supporting that she sneered again
However that 7% was a total of 2.3 million votes (7.4 of the total Votes cast) and it won them 12 Seats
May (attempting to produce a strong and stable Govt dont forget) and her Party got 13.6 mllion votes. They got 42% of the Votes but got 317 Seats
Whoa whoa - so that means the Libs got about a sixth of the Votes that the Conservatives yet got a thirtieth of the Seats ? You would think that they would have got about 42 Seats surely .... Cant be right surely ? Well under first past the post it is exactly what happens
Sneer at the Libs May - then look at the DUP. Total Votes they got 292,000 (292 thousand !) That got them 10 Seats . 10 Seats with only 300k ish Votes ? Lib Dems (sneered at) got as we have seen 2.3 million Votes - lets call that 7 times more than the DUP but only 2 seats more.
Ironic that May sneers at the LibDems and yet got the DUP and their 10 Seats to allow her to form that much trumpeted "strong and stable Govt" - She gave them everything they asked for to ensure they would come on board - and of course they will prop her up again today
Poor old Green Party got 525 thousand Votes lets call it twice as many as the DUP and 1 Seat - yes a tenth of those got by the DUP. If they (The Greens) ask for anything financial for what may be a very worthy cause May laughs them out of the place
It just CANT be right
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Which of his policies terrify you?
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Which of his policies terrify you?
Probably the fact he's actually a terrorist which the Bible that is the Daily Mail has been telling us for years!
I've just seen this last page but talking of the Lib Dems if they're the biggest pro second referendum party then they'll do well if there's another GE with Corbyn being pro Leave despite the members wanting another referendum.
-
.... and back on one of 2 horses - I had to laugh at the "sneer" by May at the Lib Dems. They stood in the last General Election on a "Second Referendum - with a view to keeping us in the EU" and what happened ? They got ONLY 7% of the people supporting that she sneered again
However that 7% was a total of 2.3 million votes (7.4 of the total Votes cast) and it won them 12 Seats
May (attempting to produce a strong and stable Govt dont forget) and her Party got 13.6 mllion votes. They got 42% of the Votes but got 317 Seats
Whoa whoa - so that means the Libs got about a sixth of the Votes that the Conservatives yet got a thirtieth of the Seats ? You would think that they would have got about 42 Seats surely .... Cant be right surely ? Well under first past the post it is exactly what happens
Sneer at the Libs May - then look at the DUP. Total Votes they got 292,000 (292 thousand !) That got them 10 Seats . 10 Seats with only 300k ish Votes ? Lib Dems (sneered at) got as we have seen 2.3 million Votes - lets call that 7 times more than the DUP but only 2 seats more.
Ironic that May sneers at the LibDems and yet got the DUP and their 10 Seats to allow her to form that much trumpeted "strong and stable Govt" - She gave them everything they asked for to ensure they would come on board - and of course they will prop her up again today
Poor old Green Party got 525 thousand Votes lets call it twice as many as the DUP and 1 Seat - yes a tenth of those got by the DUP. If they (The Greens) ask for anything financial for what may be a very worthy cause May laughs them out of the place
It just CANT be right
Not much in politics comes over as “right” does it.
Look at how Scotland voted in the 2017 GE.
The SNP won almost three times as many seats as the Conservatives but only got 8% more of the whole votes.
SNP 35 seats from 977,569 votes.
Conservatives 13 seats from 747,949.
To take it a bit further, Labour won only 7 seats from 717,007 votes.
You shouldn’t be surprised by those figures you quoted Wolfie.
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
And I've said to you before Filo (on Twitter) that neither of the main parties are fit to rule
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
And I've said to you before Filo (on Twitter) that neither of the main parties are fit to rule
What policies are you against from Labour though?
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
And I've said to you before Filo (on Twitter) that neither of the main parties are fit to rule
What policies are you against from Labour though?
I'm more aghast at Corbyn (and abbot) than Labour itself. A more moderate labour would have a chance at my vote (at the moment I find myself politically homeless).
If you wanted to look at specifics there isn't much, though I am opposed to re nationalizing railways, my view there is that you pay for a service as you use it - I dislike the idea of subsidising things. I do agree with certain social policies. UC is a massive failure and the NHS has to be protected at all costs though people need to realise outsourcing (currently necessary) is might be same as privatisation (unacceptable in the case of the NHS).
My major concern is financial, the tax the rich and companies mantra looks great on paper but in practice doesn't work. When they fail to extract the money needed it falls on the rest of us who can't move ourselves or our money overseas to pay for all these policies.
Don't get me started on his falklands sovereignty either........
In short, totally disillusioned
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
And I've said to you before Filo (on Twitter) that neither of the main parties are fit to rule
What policies are you against from Labour though?
I'm more aghast at Corbyn (and abbot) than Labour itself. A more moderate labour would have a chance at my vote (at the moment I find myself politically homeless).
If you wanted to look at specifics there isn't much, though I am opposed to re nationalizing railways, my view there is that you pay for a service as you use it - I dislike the idea of subsidising things. I do agree with certain social policies. UC is a massive failure and the NHS has to be protected at all costs though people need to realise outsourcing (currently necessary) is might be same as privatisation (unacceptable in the case of the NHS).
My major concern is financial, the tax the rich and companies mantra looks great on paper but in practice doesn't work. When they fail to extract the money needed it falls on the rest of us who can't move ourselves or our money overseas to pay for all these policies.
Don't get me started on his falklands sovereignty either........
In short, totally disillusioned
The problem with problem with privatisation of services and utilities is it is difficult to maintain competition and the conservatives don't care as it ideological and they have invested in them. LDR
''Funding for rail companies today is four times what British Rail got in the 1970s and 80s''
''Britain’s privatised railways have been getting around £5 billion on average in government support over the last five years. In the last five years of the 1980s—the earliest period we have figures for before privatisation—it was an average of £1.6 billion in today’s money''
https://fullfact.org/economy/government-funding-rail-industry-bbcqt/
So apart from privatisation/re-nationalization of railways what else are you concerned about?
-
If Britain was a private company the board would have been fired years ago, the present board perpetuate the myth that they have claim to be the money managers ably supported by the yellow press. It wouldn't surprise me if the next move was to set fire to the stand (parliament) for the insurance money.
-
.... and back on one of 2 horses - I had to laugh at the "sneer" by May at the Lib Dems. They stood in the last General Election on a "Second Referendum - with a view to keeping us in the EU" and what happened ? They got ONLY 7% of the people supporting that she sneered again
However that 7% was a total of 2.3 million votes (7.4 of the total Votes cast) and it won them 12 Seats
May (attempting to produce a strong and stable Govt dont forget) and her Party got 13.6 mllion votes. They got 42% of the Votes but got 317 Seats
Whoa whoa - so that means the Libs got about a sixth of the Votes that the Conservatives yet got a thirtieth of the Seats ? You would think that they would have got about 42 Seats surely .... Cant be right surely ? Well under first past the post it is exactly what happens
Sneer at the Libs May - then look at the DUP. Total Votes they got 292,000 (292 thousand !) That got them 10 Seats . 10 Seats with only 300k ish Votes ? Lib Dems (sneered at) got as we have seen 2.3 million Votes - lets call that 7 times more than the DUP but only 2 seats more.
Ironic that May sneers at the LibDems and yet got the DUP and their 10 Seats to allow her to form that much trumpeted "strong and stable Govt" - She gave them everything they asked for to ensure they would come on board - and of course they will prop her up again today
Poor old Green Party got 525 thousand Votes lets call it twice as many as the DUP and 1 Seat - yes a tenth of those got by the DUP. If they (The Greens) ask for anything financial for what may be a very worthy cause May laughs them out of the place
It just CANT be right
Not much in politics comes over as “right” does it.
Look at how Scotland voted in the 2017 GE.
The SNP won almost three times as many seats as the Conservatives but only got 8% more of the whole votes.
SNP 35 seats from 977,569 votes.
Conservatives 13 seats from 747,949.
To take it a bit further, Labour won only 7 seats from 717,007 votes.
You shouldn’t be surprised by those figures you quoted Wolfie.
They dont surpise me in the least
I have been trumpeting for PR for ages on here (sorry to bore everyone) - and if you need to read from people far more qualified then I am try Googling Make Votes Matter
Or here is their Twitter Page https://twitter.com/MakeVotesMatter
-
ERG want to keep her in place, Glyn, as a blame sponge.
As Mr Croft says, if May survives the VoC with just a thin sliver of votes, her position going into multi party discussion to seek a majority is weakened.
Treeza needs to cut a new deal at the time she has least negotiating traction. The EU can't pull a rabbit out of the hat for her, and why should they?
Nothing to offer, unless she makes concessions that will alienate her own support base.
No-one is going to follow her regardless, after the shambles today, apart from the DUP who will milk it dry.
I think she will try to press time by returning with the same deal tweaked. The Speaker may refuse her permission on the basis of no substantive change.
Thats all she has....unless she realigns around an amendment which goes against everything she has been saying from the get go.
Organising a party No Confidence vote in December is a funny way of keeping her in place!
-
I think JC is going to hammer the second referendum option now.
-
I mean NOW, Glyn.
The attempt to remove her as leader in December failed, so the ERG have lost that chance. They made a mistake in going for the leadership VoC when they did.
With May secure as leader, only a GE (or resignation) can remove her. Least bad option for the ERG is to let her bullshit on, for the moment, taking the country closer to the no deal exit that they prefer.
May is surplus to requirements after the end of March, unless she extends Article 50.
There is no easy means to ease her out, short of a mass cabinet revolt.
-
I think JC is going to hammer the second referendum option now.
The pressure from his party probably gives him no choice, what that means for his chances in an election are questionable, probably positive in London etc, but in places like Barnsley? Granted it's probably not enough to see them lose that many seats.
Equally he's clearly anti EU himself, will be very hard for him to change his view on his 20-30 years of beliefs...
Glyn, on May the Tories will vote least bad, they can push Theresa May a huge amount she needs them, they cannot risk a Corbyn victory giving them no chance of achieving their aims.
-
I think JC is going to hammer the second referendum option now.
The pressure from his party probably gives him no choice, what that means for his chances in an election are questionable, probably positive in London etc, but in places like Barnsley? Granted it's probably not enough to see them lose that many seats.
Equally he's clearly anti EU himself, will be very hard for him to change his view on his 20-30 years of beliefs...
Glyn, on May the Tories will vote least bad, they can push Theresa May a huge amount she needs them, they cannot risk a Corbyn victory giving them no chance of achieving their aims.
I would think that in places like Barnsley, and Doncaster for that matter, Labour would still win the seats hands down.
Obviously JC wouldn’t be to man they would be electing locally but if he is still Party Leader those seats would go towards him getting the top job.
I can’t see many hard line Labour voters casting a vote for a different party just because they didn’t like Corbyn being in charge.
-
Hound.
Problem is, as the poll before Xmas showed explicitly (and every other poll shows implicitly) there aren't that many hard line supporters of Corbyn's Labour party.
The figures in that poll did that if Lab went into a GE supporting Brexit, their support dropped to 22% and the LDs went up to 25%. And poll after poll shows that current Labour supporters don't show a great deal of support for Corbyn as leader.
Those numbers make perfect sense if you look at the issue dispassionately. The Corbynistas claim that he has reinvigorated Left politics. He hasn't. He's inspired 20-25% of the electorate and they strongly support him and Labour. But the other 15-20% of the electorate who currently support Labour are doing so despite him, not because of him. That is flaky support that could slip if pushed.
It's a mess. It might work. He might be able to hold onto that support if he plays things sensibly over Brexit. But if he carries on doing what he was doing over Xmas, saying that Labour should support Brexit, he WILL destroy Labour's electoral chances.
-
https://twitter.com/MakeVotesMatter/status/1083515097048334341 (https://twitter.com/MakeVotesMatter/status/1083515097048334341)
57% of Voters in South Yorks gave Labour a clean sweep - 43 % of the losers have no representtion whatsoever and so a lot dont even vote
-
Forgot to add.
The problem that the polls show for Corbyn is that there is NO stand over Brexit that doesn't lead to a reduction in Lab support. A very big one if he backs Brexit. A small one if he backs Ref2.
That's why he's previously had a policy of backing neither and thus appealing to both sides. But that can't survive the next few weeks. Labour has to come down on one side or the other now. And that risks exposing the flakiness of Corbyn's Labour party support.
-
It's a point, but equally as someone who did not vote Labour at the election I don't feel not represented the majority are represented and that's fine to me.
-
Most of the Labour voters that I know would still vote the same way if Kermit the Frog was party leader.
With Corbyn in charge they will still vote Labour.
We all know that the results of elections aren’t always consistent with the polls that preceded the vote.
-
For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities
It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;
"So, this might be a way forward.
MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).
If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."
-
For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities
It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;
"So, this might be a way forward.
MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).
If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."
Interesting way forward. And a seminal moment in British politics. With a decent majority, the PM is effectively unconstrained. As long as they don't piss off their party too much, they can do more or less what they want (see: Thatcher's mad monetarism experiment that f**ked the economy for a decade, or Blair's mad Iraq venture). What this plan is suggesting is that the PM is the servant of the Commons, not its master/mistress.
-
For those wondering where things go, here is a legal overview;
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/what-will-happen-next-brexit-and-the-parliamentary-possibilities
It gets a bit complicated, so the key bit from the full article is here;
"So, this might be a way forward.
MPs could amend the prime minister’s motion on her future plans, to require her to do something other than return her deal to the house for a second vote, or opt for a no deal Brexit. This seems to be the plan of a cross party group of MPs (Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin, Nicky Morgan, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall, Norman Lamb, Hilary Benn).
If their amendment were accepted by the Speaker and agreed by parliament, they would propose a new Brexit bill (already drafted). This bill authorises the House of Commons Liaison committee to publish its own plan of action for a new withdrawal agreement, and if approved by MPs, require the prime minister to renegotiate along those lines. (The Liaison committee comprises 36 select committee chairs, and is itself chaired by Sarah Wollaston, a campaigner for a second referendum)."
Interesting way forward. And a seminal moment in British politics. With a decent majority, the PM is effectively unconstrained. As long as they don't piss off their party too much, they can do more or less what they want (see: Thatcher's mad monetarism experiment that f**ked the economy for a decade, or Blair's mad Iraq venture). What this plan is suggesting is that the PM is the servant of the Commons, not its master/mistress.
It is interesting and something I suspect both main party leaders would prefer to avoid (particularly given what many labour mps think of Corbyn).
Interesting angle in PMQs today, May very much avoiding the question on what her plan should be (i'm not convinced she wants to listen). But also very much forcing the issue on to Corbyn, what would he do essentially? She knows that's a tough position for him.
-
Lots of MPs are still going to vote against Mays deal irrespective of what it contains.
How is that helping things?
Pathetic really that they are putting their own interests ahead of the rest of us.
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Which of his policies terrify you?
Probably the fact he's actually a terrorist which the Bible that is the Daily Mail has been telling us for years!
I've just seen this last page but talking of the Lib Dems if they're the biggest pro second referendum party then they'll do well if there's another GE with Corbyn being pro Leave despite the members wanting another referendum.
Can you point me to any terrorist activities hes been involved in?
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Which of his policies terrify you?
Probably the fact he's actually a terrorist which the Bible that is the Daily Mail has been telling us for years!
I've just seen this last page but talking of the Lib Dems if they're the biggest pro second referendum party then they'll do well if there's another GE with Corbyn being pro Leave despite the members wanting another referendum.
Can you point me to any terrorist activities hes been involved in?
I think he was making the point that the papers talk b*llocks about him.
3 times in his questioning he's avoided answering what he would campaign on in an election.....
-
“3 times in his questioning he's avoided answering what he would campaign on in an election.....”
Imagine that for a politician.!
-
Funny though isn't it? Corbyn was supposed to herald an age of New Politics. Straight talking. No ducking and diving and avoiding the point.
That was always an immature thing. Politicians duck and dive because the HAVE to duck and dive, not because they want to. It's like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men. They don't always give us the truth because often, we can't handle the truth. So, if they gave a straight, simple answer to a complex question, they would be crucified by the media. Corbyn appears to be learning that late in life.
-
Funny though isn't it? Corbyn was supposed to herald an age of New Politics. Straight talking. No ducking and diving and avoiding the point.
That was always an immature thing. Politicians duck and dive because the HAVE to duck and dive, not because they want to. It's like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men. They don't always give us the truth because often, we can't handle the truth. So, if they gave a straight, simple answer to a complex question, they would be crucified by the media. Corbyn appears to be learning that late in life.
Exactly. Week 1 it was calm, polite, questions from Dave from Croydon etc. Now it's shouting, comments like 'stupid woman' etc. Yet some people still cannot see through him and trust him, I find it baffling.
-
I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.
-
I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones
-
I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones
Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.
-
I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones
Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.
Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference
-
I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.
More or less in a nutshell there, but I would add they are believing what the right wing media are feeding them
-
I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.
More or less in a nutshell there, but I would add they are believing what the right wing media are feeding them
You can make the same argument for any political view
-
Aye.
Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.
-
Interesting though that only 29% of respondents in a yougov poll want a change of government. That stuns me.
-
Aye.
Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.
The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise
-
I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones
Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.
Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference
Stating your opinion to back up a statement kind of is an argument.
-
I’m not a Corbyn lover, he’s not for me, but these people that think he’s a Jew hating terrorist are just believing what they want to believe. It’s pretty clear what kind of person he is.
This. Every day. Some people are gullible enough to lap up what the Daily Mail tells them.
-
The Government now support convicted criminals
https://news.sky.com/story/conservative-mps-set-up-holiday-fund-for-convicted-tory-agent-11609064?
-
Aye.
Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.
The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise
How is Owen Jones "mass-circulation media"?
And if you equate the Mirror's approach to facts with that of the Express and Mail, well...
-
The Government now support convicted criminals
https://news.sky.com/story/conservative-mps-set-up-holiday-fund-for-convicted-tory-agent-11609064?
I can understand an overspend could have happened inadvertently and without malice aforethought, but for the action of deliberately forging fraudulent documentation to be dismissed as merely 'doing what she thought was best for the party' as if it merits rewarding is breathtaking.
-
I just see him as a grown up "Rik" from the young ones
Well there's a concrete argument if ever there was one.
Its a statement of personal opinion, not an argument, there is a difference
Stating your opinion to back up a statement kind of is an argument.
Oh no it’s not :chair:
-
Aye.
Except you don't get many mass-circulation media outlets as far to the left, or as far removed from inconvenient things like truth and accuracy as The Sun/Mail/Express are on the right. So there isn't an equivalence.
The devil's advocate in me would say the Mirror and anything by Owen Jones would suggest otherwise
How is Owen Jones "mass-circulation media"?
And if you equate the Mirror's approach to facts with that of the Express and Mail, well...
The guardian.........
-
You're seriously equating The Guardian and The Mail?
It's not about whether they're right or left? It's about whether they lie to you.
I'll tell you a story about the Mail. I've posted it on here before but it's worth telling.
A few years ago, my company was involved in an R&D project that was part-funded by the EU. It brought together companies from the UK, Holland, Spain, Greece, Italy, Germany and Sweden.
It was very successful. We did some final demo tests which got a lot of media attention.
We put out a press release. Newspapers all over the world reported on it. Literally from Japan to Brazil. All the papers printed our press release, word for word.
Except one.
The Mail.
The Mail removed two sentences from the press release.
One sentence that listed all the other EU countries involved.
One sentence that stated that the EU had part-funded the project.
Some lying, devious, misleading Kitson in the editorial office of the Mail took a decision to deliberately misinform their readership, because the true story reflected well on the EU.
If they do that over something so irrelevant, what do you think they do over important things?
The people who own and run that paper, and the Express and the Sun are a f**king cancer in our society.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46899466
Well, that was worthwhile wasn't it?
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46899466
Well, that was worthwhile wasn't it?
Anyone surprised?
-
Not in the slightest.
Turkeys would not vote for Christmas so these lot as split as they are (and today pretended NOT to be) voted to keep themselves in a cushy job - JUST in case they lost their Seats in a General Election !
So not in the slightest - and on the face of it it must look like a complete waste of time that could have been spent on sorting out the EU mess or Universal Credit etc
What people watching this in this Country and some others around the World must think I dread to think
-
The big bribe of public money did the job for them, and to rub salt into their wounds, Dodds stood up in the house and basically told them that May is their bitch
-
.... AND he/they are right.
-
Corbyn setting out May taking No Deal of the table before he would go into talks with her was quite cute. It means she can't then threaten moderate Labour MP's with this - plus it gains a rump of disaffected ERG's who may be tempted to vote with him next time if he does go into those talks, they fail, and he calls another VofC.
-
On what planet are ERG members going to vote to give Corbyn a shot at No10?
-
Corbyn setting out May taking No Deal of the table before he would go into talks with her was quite cute. It means she can't then threaten moderate Labour MP's with this - plus it gains a rump of disaffected ERG's who may be tempted to vote with him next time if he does go into those talks, they fail, and he calls another VofC.
It arguably sums up why stalemate will remain. It's unlikely she will go for it but let's see what her statement says. He hasn't come out of this well at all.
-
Oh god - more misery as "she" makes a statement at 10pm
Bingo anyone ? Strong and Stable Govt - Must deliver on the will of the British people - I resign
Doubt it will be the last one !
-
It will be a statement saying the DUP will let her be in charge overnight while they go to bed 😀
-
Well that was a pointless conference, she’s like a turd that won’t flush
-
The question is where do we go from here? The Government has to put a motion before the house on Monday.
I think JC is banking on TM's motion to propose either a customs union deal (losing the ERG and hard Brexiteers support) or no deal (losing Tory Remainers and 'centrists' support). I think he hopes a committed move in either direction from the PM opens the door for another VoC that he thinks he may win.
I don't think JC will move to support a 2nd referendum until he has tabled at least 1 more unsuccessful VoC. I really doubt he would have started this fight yesterday if he didn't think he could win.
Either way, the UK will not be leaving on 29th March 2019.
-
Just so, Mr Croft....just so!
-
I'll repeat. On what planet will the ERG vote to give Corbyn a shot at No10?
Actually, there IS one far distant planet. The one where the ERG thinks there would be a harder Brexit under Corbyn than under May...
-
A Corbyn ministry terrifies me
Why?
You’ve seen what damage the present dictator has done?
And I've said to you before Filo (on Twitter) that neither of the main parties are fit to rule
What policies are you against from Labour though?
I'm more aghast at Corbyn (and abbot) than Labour itself. A more moderate labour would have a chance at my vote (at the moment I find myself politically homeless).
If you wanted to look at specifics there isn't much, though I am opposed to re nationalizing railways, my view there is that you pay for a service as you use it - I dislike the idea of subsidising things. I do agree with certain social policies. UC is a massive failure and the NHS has to be protected at all costs though people need to realise outsourcing (currently necessary) is might be same as privatisation (unacceptable in the case of the NHS).
My major concern is financial, the tax the rich and companies mantra looks great on paper but in practice doesn't work. When they fail to extract the money needed it falls on the rest of us who can't move ourselves or our money overseas to pay for all these policies.
Don't get me started on his falklands sovereignty either........
In short, totally disillusioned
The problem with privatisation of services and utilities is it is difficult to maintain competition and the conservatives don't care as it ideological and they have invested in them. LDR
''Funding for rail companies today is four times what British Rail got in the 1970s and 80s''
''Britain’s privatised railways have been getting around £5 billion on average in government support over the last five years. In the last five years of the 1980s—the earliest period we have figures for before privatisation—it was an average of £1.6 billion in today’s money''
https://fullfact.org/economy/government-funding-rail-industry-bbcqt/
So apart from privatisation/re-nationalization of railways what else are you concerned about?
LDR, have a look at the screen shot and tell us what you think of the user-pays principle/model.
I'm not sure myself how the subsidies work, are they straight out gifts to the private sector, are they loans or does the public get a slice of the franchise to be cashed in when the lease period is up? we should get something for propping up private companies, though my position is that public transport like education and health etc is a necessity and a benefit to the nation and should not be forced to make a profit.
https://screenshots.firefox.com/zdc6CM6xNSsKTFEb/www.ft.com
https://www.ft.com/content/90c0f8e8-17fd-11e8-9e9c-25c814761640
Some time ago Herbert Anchovy cast doubt on our ability to re-nationalize the railways while still in the EU, but according to the chart and the subsidies we still pay out(see screen shot) all we would have to do HA is to take back any franchise at the end of the lease and have the government set up a dummy franchisee with a single govt' officer in control and fund 100% of the operation via subsidies and voila nationalization.
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
......and yet I still haven’t seen a Deal proposal from Corbyn, or anyone else for that matter.
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
......and yet I still haven’t seen a Deal proposal from Corbyn, or anyone else for that matter.
You can't really offer a deal from opposition unless it's a joint deal with cooperation from the government, you can only state policy that your party will adopt if it gets to government. May has known since she was handed the poisoned chalice that she would not be able to broker a deal in her own party let alone across the government.
-
Hound
Kier Starmer has set out Labour's position time and again.
The key point where it differs from May's deal is that Labour would stay in the Customs Union.
That is the nub of the whole issue.
May said we would leave the CU.
If we leave the CU, we CANNOT get a trade deal with the EU, because us leaving the CU would f**k Ireland and the EU has had that as a red line from Day 1.
So, if you leave the CU, either you find a magic unicorn that makes the Irish border vanish (Boris Johnson's "plan") you treat NI differently and they stay in the CU (the backstop) or you accept that there will be no deal with the EU, with all the economic Armageddon that will produce (Rees-Mogg's "plan").
It's THAT simple. May has brought this on us by deciding that Brexit meant leaving the CU. Labour says Brexit does not require us to leave the CU (although admittedly, Corbyn had to be dragged to that position by wiser heads).
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
......and yet I still haven’t seen a Deal proposal from Corbyn, or anyone else for that matter.
You can't really offer a deal from opposition unless it's a joint deal with cooperation from the government, you can only state policy that your party will adopt if it gets to government. May has known since she was handed the poisoned chalice that she would not be able to broker a deal in her own party let alone across the government.
Ok, fair enough.
I did suggest a few weeks ago that the best way forward was an all party “war cabinet” type of thing, putting country first before the bashing of their opponents.
However, whenever some MP or another has a pop at the May deal and is asked what they think should be done in a particular circumstance, not one of them comes up with a constructive response.
In fact it is very rare that one of them actually answers a question.
The proposed cross party talks will be interesting if only to see what alternatives are suggested.
-
How can there be talks with May when she said in Parliament last night that she wouldn't accept any major changes to her deal. (Y'know. That deal that lost by a bigger margin than any Govt Bill in history...)
What are the other parties supposed to discuss with her?
-
How can there be talks with May when she said in Parliament last night that she wouldn't accept any major changes to her deal. (Y'know. That deal that lost by a bigger margin than any Govt Bill in history...)
What are the other parties supposed to discuss with her?
Putting lipstick on the pig?
-
How can there be talks with May when she said in Parliament last night that she wouldn't accept any major changes to her deal. (Y'know. That deal that lost by a bigger margin than any Govt Bill in history...)
What are the other parties supposed to discuss with her?
It’s just an exercise in shifting the blame for her, she’ll say look I tried but no one would move on their red lines, another attempt at running down the clock
-
On what planet are ERG members going to vote to give Corbyn a shot at No10?
When it looks like Brexit is going to die and a General Election is the only way they can see of keeping it alive.
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
Exactly. He wants May to publicly alienate the ERG so they'll turn against her even more.
-
Corbyn has really painted himself in a corner by setting pre-conditions for meeting May. In doing so, he's making No Deal more likely.
Don't forget, No Deal is the default position.
-
Corbyn has really painted himself in a corner by setting pre-conditions for meeting May. In doing so, he's making No Deal more likely.
Don't forget, No Deal is the default position.
All the other opposition parties have set the same pre condition, the only difference is Corbyn told her in the chamber, the rest told her in a meeting
-
Corbyn has really painted himself in a corner by setting pre-conditions for meeting May. In doing so, he's making No Deal more likely.
Don't forget, No Deal is the default position.
She publicly stated she is looking for Brexit to go ahead, she has said she won't rule out No Deal and won't be changing her deal much/along with the EU saying they won't budge. She is turning this into a run away train heading only to No Deal.
-
Corbyn has really painted himself in a corner by setting pre-conditions for meeting May. In doing so, he's making No Deal more likely.
Don't forget, No Deal is the default position.
All the other opposition parties have set the same pre condition, the only difference is Corbyn told her in the chamber, the rest told her in a meeting
They told her that to her face, which is fair enough. Corbyn refused to meet her. I can only conclude he isn't interested in sorting out Brexit and is obsessed with having a General Election (which won't resolve Brexit, by the way.)
I suspect if he could, Corbyn would like to rule out a Second Referendum, although here he is constrained by the Labour Party Conference vote.
-
If there is a GE would you still vote the same way? (This is mainly aimed at the people who voted to leave as I can’t imagine the remainers have changed there mind) I voted leave, and I’d still vote the same way my self
-
If there is a GE would you still vote the same way? (This is mainly aimed at the people who voted to leave as I can’t imagine the remainers have changed there mind) I voted leave, and I’d still vote the same way my self
Am not sure you can equate the 2 mate. I voted leave, would again (though the monumental f**k sauce they are making of it casts some doubts on the process) but I wouldn't vote the same in a GE as I did last time as I couldnt back either main party. I have concluded that no one in the house is interested in anything else than lining their own pockets and those of their principle backers ( big business / unions)
-
Corbyn is not playing a blinder refusing to talk - it makes him look like a child and we're already seeing comments such as "you openly invite terrorists to parliament but won't talk to the PM without conditions". That's not a good place for him to be and it's coming from some of his MPs also - though some of those are hardly impartial.
To the public it just doesn't make him appear a good leader, plays up to his hardcore fanatics but then anything would. He won't ever have power with those tactics.
-
On what planet are ERG members going to vote to give Corbyn a shot at No10?
When it looks like Brexit is going to die and a General Election is the only way they can see of keeping it alive.
Except this isn't about Brexit.
This is about the heart and soul and future direction of the Tory party.
I don't for one minute believe that the ERG members actually think we would be fine and dandy and economically stronger with the no deal, WTO-terms Brexit. There is no one in the world who has studied the issue for 5 minutes who believes that. It would be economically devastating.
So my take is that the ERG don't want a no deal Brexit. They want to be able to stick the knife into the Tories who stop us getting a no deal Brexit. The majority of the Tory party membership DO want a hard Brexit, because they are ancient Little Empire-ists. So they will hate the Tories who come up with any sort of deal less than a hard Brexit. The ERG want to buttress their position in the party with those people, who are the ones who will choose the next leader. They want to take over the party. That's their aim. Brexit is a method.
If this analysis is right, there is no benefit whatsoever for the ERG to give Corbyn a shot at No 10.
-
Corbyn's letter to Theresa May re: no deal: https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1085892746668331008
-
Mr Corbyn is missing a good opportunity here by not attending the cross party talks.
IF the talks resulted in a deal being struck which would be acceptable to Parliament and more importantly, to the EU, then Corbyn and the Labour Party members would always be able to say that it was them who got the thing sorted out.
I think he will collect his toys up anyway soon and join in the chat, he has no option really.
JC is just operating a week in front of everyone else by trying to get May to take no deal off the table. Parliament will force her to do that in the next week or so. May just shows no signs of any forward thinking or flexibility.
Exactly. He wants May to publicly alienate the ERG so they'll turn against her even more.
It beggars belief that blame is being laid at the feet of JC, since Cameroon very wisely thought that he'd rather be judged a failed weasel than a weaseling failure and resigned the EU have stated that the will of the 27 EU nations will take precedence over some crazy wish list emanating from an increasingly desperate and selfish conservative party. May has continually stated against all wisdom that she would be able to cut a deal where there was no hope and still is no hope and has only recently in further desperation offered some paltry workers rights hoping to garner public opinion. I still think that if Britain moves to a GE, JC will have to resign because he cannot contemplate a second vote under which labor will be deserted by the younger voters and annihilated at the polls.
''What is the Brexit deal on the table? Theresa May's controversial EU withdrawal agreement''
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-may-eu-brexit-deal-key-points-withdrawal-agreement-a4038526.html
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/17/may-will-stick-to-brexit-principles-in-cross-party-talks-says-no-10
So what exactly is the point of holding talks if you're not actually going to budge on anything meaningful?
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/17/may-will-stick-to-brexit-principles-in-cross-party-talks-says-no-10
So what exactly is the point of holding talks if you're not actually going to budge on anything meaningful?
It's almost as stupid as continually crossing the channel asking for more when there is no more on offer.
-
As I said the other day, I'm starting to seriously question May's mental health. She seems utterly detached from the reality and critical nature of the situation.
-
As I said the other day, I'm starting to seriously question May's mental health. She seems utterly detached from the reality and critical nature of the situation.
Is there any chance we can have her certified?
-
As I said the other day, I'm starting to seriously question May's mental health. She seems utterly detached from the reality and critical nature of the situation.
Is there any chance we can have her certified?
''Business leaders urge Theresa May to introduce new laws on mental health first aid in the workplace''
This is a big hint?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/18/business-leaders-urge-theresa-may-introduce-new-laws-mental/
-
As I said the other day, I'm starting to seriously question May's mental health. She seems utterly detached from the reality and critical nature of the situation.
Is there any chance we can have her certified?
''Business leaders urge Theresa May to introduce new laws on mental health first aid in the workplace''
This is a big hint?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/18/business-leaders-urge-theresa-may-introduce-new-laws-mental/
My company is big on mental health first aid and I’ve done the course. I can categorically say, there is no hope for Mrs May.
-
If there is a GE would you still vote the same way? (This is mainly aimed at the people who voted to leave as I can’t imagine the remainers have changed there mind) I voted leave, and I’d still vote the same way my self
Am not sure you can equate the 2 mate. I voted leave, would again (though the monumental f**k sauce they are making of it casts some doubts on the process) but I wouldn't vote the same in a GE as I did last time as I couldnt back either main party. I have concluded that no one in the house is interested in anything else than lining their own pockets and those of their principle backers ( big business / unions)
Me too. All the major parties are professional politicians playing a game and getting rich at our expense. I think half of them don't even care which party they represent as long as they can keep their snouts in the trough. If we don't get a proper Brexit as we voted for, then in future I will either not bother to vote, or will vote for a more extreme party that actually has proper beliefs.
-
I said this on twitter yesterday, in many of Country’s if their Government was acting like ours they’d either be on the brink of civil war or a coup would have teken place
-
I said this on twitter yesterday, in many of Country’s if their Government was acting like ours they’d either be on the brink of civil war or a coup would have teken place
Where's old Ollie Cromwell when you need him?
-
As I said the other day, I'm starting to seriously question May's mental health. She seems utterly detached from the reality and critical nature of the situation.
She's trying to band together MP's across the political spectrum, to negotiate a deal that delivers on the RF .
Something JC is childishly refusing to do, in the vain hope of staying relevant.
The irony is, the only way he can be relevant is by engaging in discussions for the good of the country
I admire her courage and staying power.
-
Boomstick.
Which part of her saying that she will not countenance making major changes to her deal, a day after the biggest Govt defeat in British history is her "trying to band together MP's across the political spectrum, to negotiate a deal"?
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
-
Hound
It's THAT simple. May has brought this on us by deciding that Brexit meant leaving the CU. Labour says Brexit does not require us to leave the CU (although admittedly, Corbyn had to be dragged to that position by wiser heads).
You keep saying this but it's just not true. Starmer and Corbyn announced together that a CU was official Labour policy in August 2017. Starmer in the Observer and Corbyn on the Marr show.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/27/labour-jeremy-corbyn-brexit-policy-change
Agreed with everything else you had to say about the policy tho.
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
And by Gary Gibbon on Channel 4 just now. The only people who said the talks were constructive were the ERG.
-
Aye, constructive by way of making no deal more likely...
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
She'd be damn right stupid if she took no deal off the table, it's her strongest bargaining chip.
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
She'd be damn right stupid if she took no deal off the table, it's her strongest bargaining chip.
it's a funny bargaining chip when it's preventing other parties from being persuaded to back her in Parliament.
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
She'd be damn right stupid if she took no deal off the table, it's her strongest bargaining chip.
it's a funny bargaining chip when it's preventing other parties from being persuaded to back her in Parliament.
It's not preventing them at all.
The irony that is lost on you is that in order to stop exiting on WTO terms, then NOW is the time for sensible discussion and discourse.
If they don't come to the table, they are proving themselves to be self serving idiots.
WTO terms is a real possibility otherwise.
Much more likely than a people's vote.
May is playing a blinder here.
-
The "end-game" here will be 30 Tory Europhiles (Soubry etc) having to make a choice between "no deal" or bringing down their own goverment. There will be twists and turns over the next few weeks, but that is what the final outcome will be based on.
-
The "end-game" here will be 30 Tory Europhiles (Soubry etc) having to make a choice between "no deal" or bringing down their own goverment. There will be twists and turns over the next few weeks, but that is what the final outcome will be based on.
In between now and that endgame, how does May turn round the other 85 MPs she needs to given that she can't present her deal to the Commons in its present form again?
-
Hound
It's THAT simple. May has brought this on us by deciding that Brexit meant leaving the CU. Labour says Brexit does not require us to leave the CU (although admittedly, Corbyn had to be dragged to that position by wiser heads).
You keep saying this but it's just not true. Starmer and Corbyn announced together that a CU was official Labour policy in August 2017. Starmer in the Observer and Corbyn on the Marr show.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/27/labour-jeremy-corbyn-brexit-policy-change
Agreed with everything else you had to say about the policy tho.
Conveniently, you ignore the 14 months before August 2017 Wilts, when it was widely reported that Corbyn wanted us out of the CU.
-
But she doesn't need to turn them around does she. She doesn't need to do anything.
Have you looked at the processes needed to revoke Article 50? Or delay it? Or call a second referendum? A "majority in the house" on its own isn't quite sufficient.
Even to frustrate "no deal", they will have to either rely on "amendments" like they did with the Finance Bill last week. Or as I just said, hope that Soubry etc decide to vote to bring down their own government the next time JC tables another no confidence vote.
-
BS
No Deal/WTO Brexit isn't on the agenda. There are 550+ MPs who will not allow it.
If May doesn't see sense and kill that idea, she will be sidelined, by Cabinet, Tory Party or the Commons and a bill will be brought to put that stupid concept where it belongs.
-
Okay BST, I don't want to argue about the rights and wrongs of either side. Nor have I tried to. I've simply made a prediction.
Tell me how we avoid no deal through parliament. Who votes where etc. Very interested to know.
-
The Maybot is desperate to hold the warring factions in the Tory Party from full on blue on blue civil war.
At some point, she will have to face the fact that this is not acheivable, in the circumstances she has created.
If Treeza were a bright lass, she would agree to rule out "no deal", and widen the potential support base for a viable alternative.
The ERG would be livid, but also between a rock and a hard place.
They are content to drift towards the rocks, as long as no deal remains the default.
Once it is off the table, they can either row in behind a revision brought via an amendment, or split off from the parliamentary Tory Party.
There would be payback from the members for May, but she is standing down anyway, so does not need to keep them sweet.
But Treeza is not the sharpest blade in the toolbox......not by a long chalk!
-
The Maybot is desperate to hold the warring factions in the Tory Party from full on blue on blue civil war.
At some point, she will have to face the fact that this is not acheivable, in the circumstances she has created.
If Treeza were a bright lass, she would agree to rule out "no deal", and widen the potential support base for a viable alternative.
The ERG would be livid, but also between a rock and a hard place.
They are content to drift towards the rocks, as long as no deal remains the default.
Once it is off the table, they can either row in behind a revision brought via an amendment, or split off from the parliamentary Tory Party.
There would be payback from the members for May, but she is standing down anyway, so does not need to keep them sweet.
But Treeza is not the sharpest blade in the toolbox......not by a long chalk!
Here is a list of names of those people that think a no-deal brexit will not happen and May will have to compromise or go ..............
https://simple.wikiquote.org/wiki/List_of_people_by_name
-
So your saying these discussions that are happening, aren't happening?
If you can call something like :
"What will you compromise on, PM?"
"Nothing, you have to vote for my deal"
"Goodbye"
as a discussion, then yes, they are taking place.
Oh, you've been invited to them have you?
That's what been reported by the BBC as happening. The other parties (LibDems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Green), although they have met with her have also asked May to take No Deal off the table before talking and she's refused, so end of discussion.
What's your version of what has been happening?
She'd be damn right stupid if she took no deal off the table, it's her strongest bargaining chip.
it's a funny bargaining chip when it's preventing other parties from being persuaded to back her in Parliament.
It's not preventing them at all.
The irony that is lost on you is that in order to stop exiting on WTO terms, then NOW is the time for sensible discussion and discourse.
If they don't come to the table, they are proving themselves to be self serving idiots.
WTO terms is a real possibility otherwise.
Much more likely than a people's vote.
May is playing a blinder here.
Self serving? May's literally sticking to her guns so she doesn't piss off the ERG. If she agreed with the other parties she'd have a section of her own party wanting her gone that very moment, so she's doing this to stay as Tory leader.
-
BS
No Deal/WTO Brexit isn't on the agenda. There are 550+ MPs who will not allow it.
If May doesn't see sense and kill that idea, she will be sidelined, by Cabinet, Tory Party or the Commons and a bill will be brought to put that stupid concept where it belongs.
It's not a 'concept' . It's the CURRENT default position.
-
Indeed. And what I'm waiting for someone to explain to me (because I genuinely do not know) is the Parliamentary process that will happen to thwart a no deal. The fact that there are allegedly hundreds of MPs against it is all well and good. But Article 50 is enshrined in UK Law. Overturning that requires the government support overturning it and the same goes for a second referendum.
I'm interested to know how certain people can be so absolutely and vehemently convinced that no deal is never going to happen. It really doesn't appear that clear cut to me. Hence the vote of no confidence, of which there will be more and the "amendment" to the Finance Bill last week. If it were so simple to revoke or delah article 50, why haven't they done it yet?
The closer we get to a no deal, the more votes of no confidence you are going to see. Hence my earlier comment that those 30 Europhile MPs are at some point going to find themselves choosing between no deal or bringing down the government.
-
Tommy.
To get why we won't have No Deal, you have to clearly see why it's being threatened.
No one, beyond a couple of dozen utter nutcases in the ERG want it.
Because it would be a catastrophe.
May doesn't want it because leading the country into that disaster would cement her legacy as not just the worst PM of all time, but the worst imaginable.
Most of the Tory Brexiteers don't want it because, despite outward appearances, they are not thick or impervious to facts.
May is hanging out the possibility of no deal to try to bully people into supporting her deal.
Over the next few weeks, either opposition to her deal with crumble and she'll get it passed (plot spoiler: that won't happen) or it will become clear that no variant of her deal will pass. At that point, either May will crack, or she will be effectively sidelined by Cabinet and the move to delay A50 will kick in.
Meantime, even the few Cabinet ministers who claim that No Deal will be fine do not actually mean that. They are manoeuvring in order to be able to claim to the rabidly Euro-sceptic Tory membership that it was not they who blocked No Deal. It was the traitors on the Left and Centre of the party.
No deal is being used for political posturing purposes. It WILL be sidelined when we get to the cliff edge.
-
I agree mostly with BST. I more expect movement on the deal not to a full customs union but variant on it.
-
The Maybot is desperate to hold the warring factions in the Tory Party from full on blue on blue civil war.
At some point, she will have to face the fact that this is not acheivable, in the circumstances she has created.
If Treeza were a bright lass, she would agree to rule out "no deal", and widen the potential support base for a viable alternative.
The ERG would be livid, but also between a rock and a hard place.
They are content to drift towards the rocks, as long as no deal remains the default.
Once it is off the table, they can either row in behind a revision brought via an amendment, or split off from the parliamentary Tory Party.
There would be payback from the members for May, but she is standing down anyway, so does not need to keep them sweet.
But Treeza is not the sharpest blade in the toolbox......not by a long chalk!
Very condescending to try to claim that TM is a bit thick.
-
Public perception is everything,...They are all as bad as each other,May is making an absolute balls of it and Corbyn is somehow managing to lose public support for the labour party at the same time..
The public perception from most people after the events of the last ten days is the lot of them whatever party they represent are more interested in there own political gains than whats best for the country...I don't think the public has ever been more fed up than they are now..Everyone I speak to says the same..If they are Tory's they are ashamed of this government and if they are Labour they say that Corbyns incompetent...Cant comment on the Liberals,i don't know any..lol
-
Indeed. And what I'm waiting for someone to explain to me (because I genuinely do not know) is the Parliamentary process that will happen to thwart a no deal. The fact that there are allegedly hundreds of MPs against it is all well and good. But Article 50 is enshrined in UK Law. Overturning that requires the government support overturning it and the same goes for a second referendum.
I'm interested to know how certain people can be so absolutely and vehemently convinced that no deal is never going to happen. It really doesn't appear that clear cut to me. Hence the vote of no confidence, of which there will be more and the "amendment" to the Finance Bill last week. If it were so simple to revoke or delah article 50, why haven't they done it yet?
The closer we get to a no deal, the more votes of no confidence you are going to see. Hence my earlier comment that those 30 Europhile MPs are at some point going to find themselves choosing between no deal or bringing down the government.
https://www.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2258078687850197/
-
There is a good argument to be made about public perception over policy.
Cameron beat Miliband and Brown because he looked more pm material
Blair beat Major / Howard / Hague? For the same reason
Any beat Kinnock see above
Does the look have a big psychological input?
Currently no one looks pm material
Forgive any innacuracies it's been a long morning
-
Meanwhile, the deceit goes on and on and on....
https://www.facebook.com/scientistsforeu/videos/1725344147571743/
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
-
LDR
That is a very important point you make there.
Most people's engagement with politics is extremely superficial.
So it didn't matter that Hague regularly tied Blair in knots at PMQs. Hague looked like a foetus and Blair looked commanding.
Similarly, it didn't matter that Milliband and Balls comprehensively won the argument on Austerity. One of them looked like Wallace choking on a bacon sarnie and the other one blinked a lot. Whereas Cameron had that patrician air of calm confidence.
In 2008/9, at the depths of the Great Crash, a (Tory supporting) journalist from The Sunday Times shadowed Gordon Brown for 2 months and write articles about what he was doing to trying to save the British economy, and persuade global leaders to do similar things.
She said that she had been astonished at Brown's command of facts, rapid judgement, and ability to argue a case logically and firmly. She (a Tory) said that she came away from the experience with a deep respect for Brown that was entirely at odds with the bumbling, bungling, morose loser that was his public image. She said it was inevitable that he would lose the next Election because of that image. And she finished by saying that, if that were the case, we, the electorate, would get what we deserved.
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
She’s not a “normal” person though is she. The world is evolving so fast and the parliamentary system is still the same as it was 200 years ago and we end up with leaders like May. The whole system needs changing. You only have to watch the way MPs behave in the commons. It’s completely unprofessional at times and a lot of them just appear rude with their shouting out and grumbling. It’s completely outdated.
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
That's a bit generous. Captain Birdseye would appear more statesmanlike than her.
-
Actually, I'm quite pleased with that Captain Mainwaring analogy. He had a massively over-inflated sense of his own ability and authority. He "led" a team that squabbled like kids, were absolutely hopeless at what they were doing, and were convinced that nasty Europeans were trying to destroy their way of life. When faced with the enemy, he had nothing whatsoever to fight with. And everything he touched turned to shite.
-
Actually, I'm quite pleased with that Captain Mainwaring analogy. He had a massively over-inflated sense of his own ability and authority. He "led" a team that squabbled like kids, were absolutely hopeless at what they were doing, and were convinced that nasty Europeans were trying to destroy their way of life. When faced with the enemy, he had nothing whatsoever to fight with. And everything he touched turned to shite.
Nah, Mainwaring's troops actually followed him.
Oh, and , even though they were hopeless and had no real weaponry, you know that every one of them would fight to the death regardless if faced with the real enemy.
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
That's a bit generous. Captain Birdseye would appear more statesmanlike than her.
"Vote for my deal or you'll never see your kids again!"
-
Actually, I'm quite pleased with that Captain Mainwaring analogy. He had a massively over-inflated sense of his own ability and authority. He "led" a team that squabbled like kids, were absolutely hopeless at what they were doing, and were convinced that nasty Europeans were trying to destroy their way of life. When faced with the enemy, he had nothing whatsoever to fight with. And everything he touched turned to shite.
Nah, Mainwaring's troops actually followed him.
Oh, and , even though they were hopeless and had no real weaponry, you know that every one of them would fight to the death regardless if faced with the real enemy.
And at least he had some appearance of having a f**king clue. Even if not much of it...
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
She’s not a “normal” person though is she. The world is evolving so fast and the parliamentary system is still the same as it was 200 years ago and we end up with leaders like May. The whole system needs changing. You only have to watch the way MPs behave in the commons. It’s completely unprofessional at times and a lot of them just appear rude with their shouting out and grumbling. It’s completely outdated.
Completely agree with all that.
Complete set of Kids (if thats not being too unkind to kids because a lot I know are far better behaved than that)
They also whether in or out of "that place almost NEVER answer any questions UNLESS as seen in PMQs it is one they do want to answer"
Mrs May is no worse than anyone else on her side nor Labour in that respect - just an odd time you get Sir Vince Cable who is direct to the point and answers directly usually and Caroline Lucas (Green Party Leader / MP) who also does not fudge any issues that I have seen
Unfortunately neither of those have any chance of being elected under First past the Post. All we need is a modernised electoral system and dare I say a new Building to house those newly elected people in - and we could have a fresh start
Wont happen in my lifetime but would love to think we leave the 6 Club - that being the 6 Western democracies that DONT have PR in some format or other
Canada USA Ghana Australia us and one other I cant be bothered to look up ! They are mostly "big" but big doen not mean better
-
I know this is a labour area,and I know that the vast majority of people on here are Labour supporters which is why we see post after post slamming May's ineptitude on how her government is leading this process..And I'm not disagreeing with it..
What we don't see is any criticism of the labour party and how Corbyn is leading his party which is just as incompetent as her..BST is right that politics to the majority of people is superficial which is why the British public watch on and believe he's not making a effort for the country..They see him strategically plan a no confidence vote to try and force a general election,that failed..They see no firm alternative brexit plan from him that has a hope in hell of being accepted by the EU and they don't get the impression he is capable of leading a piss up in a brewery..
The public want everybody to get round the table and thrash something out and Corbyn's response is to send a letter to everyone of his mp's demanding they don't engage in cross party talks...Now people can reply and give reasons why they wont because May wont shift but that doesn't matter because the public perception makes it look like he isn't making any effort for his country.Whether that be fact or not
This is the most unpopular government since Guy Fawkes decided he fancied a bonfire,yet still they are infront in the polls.Infact it wouldn't surprise me that even after May's performance this last ten days she has probably increased that lead as crazy as that sounds...
If Labour had a leader who the public thought was electable,produced a brexit plan that could be negotiated for all to see,came out and told the public what there stance was on a second referendum then maybe they would be doing a lot better than they are..
-
Interesting piece by Preston, Glyn.
That sums up what I mean by being worried about May's connection with reality. She is outwardly acting as though she truly was a Strong and Stable leader. She's behaving as though she is dictating the agenda.
But she's not dictating anything. No-one is listening to her. She doesn't have the power to direct anyone to follow the path that she wants.
It's bizarre and, from a human point of view, a bit sad to watch. She's acting like she thinks she's Churchill. Everyone else sees her as Captain Mainwaring.
She’s not a “normal” person though is she. The world is evolving so fast and the parliamentary system is still the same as it was 200 years ago and we end up with leaders like May. The whole system needs changing. You only have to watch the way MPs behave in the commons. It’s completely unprofessional at times and a lot of them just appear rude with their shouting out and grumbling. It’s completely outdated.
I would love to see ANY deal or any no deal or even a second vote to keep us IN just JUST JUST JUST JUSTso at no Point EVER in the future can she claim ANY credit for the "success" in delivering the exit from the EU
Get her hammered and then I can be the one at 10DS pointlessly shouting " have you delivered a strong a stable Govt EX Prime Minister" " have you delivered on the will of the British people EX Prime Minister" "were you the worst Prime Minister ever EX Prime Minister"
.... and Andrew Marr could shout " you can tell us now EX Prime Minister - did you know about the accidental firing of a Trident missile ?"
Sorry - I need help !
-
Hi WC
I was just posting my essay above and I allude to Labour being just as bad as the Conservatives in Question answering
I agree that Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn look very poor. Because I live in a Labour stronghold and have relatives who live around the area as well further west - I often discuss B****t with them and mostly they say 2 things :
a) what would a GE do to alter the process (the only thing I can offer is Labour MAY campaign on a Remain ticket) though JC would be unlikely to do that.
b) they agree Labour will not win a GE under JC despite him being relatively popular amongst the Membership - and that they (my friends and relatives) say they WOULD not vote for Labour while he is in charge
That bodes badly for the Party and is particularly worrying given the mess we appear to be in with lots of major issues :chair:
Ive added a chair because I will probably get flayed but I am but one Voter - with just my one Vote - with no great political expertise - and that opinion above is how I see it and the observations of local people
I bet May is kicking herself because if she actually called a Snap Election now and resisted repeating "a strong and stable Govt" about a million times she would probably carry the day.
-
I thought Vince Cable made an interesting point yesterday. He said that May has no chance of getting her deal through Parliament. However, he also said if she wants a chance of getting her way she should put it to a referendum.
I wonder if she will move in that direction if/ when her attempt at "one more heave" fails?
-
I very much doubt she will do that and I don't think the country really has a appetite for it..The liberals are the only party to come out and make there position clear that they favour a second peoples vote (one of the most inaccurate names they could think off) And there support remains stagnant..
I don't believe the public want a vote right now on anything,they wouldn't probably bother to get out and vote,the turn out would be awfull...The first vote was billed as a once in a lifetime vote,the public want the politicians to just get on and get it sorted...
They can count themselves lucky this is not France else most major city's would be burning every weekend..
-
DW...I've never voted Labour in my life,i voted Liberal when I was younger but have been a Tory ever since.My position right now is that I'm not anything..I'm waiting to be swayed by a party who is prepared to show some proper unity and strength and if that was Labour then I would vote for them...
I've always said if you cant be bothered to use your democratic right to go and put a cross in a box,dont argue about the concequences,but right at this minute if we had a GE tomorrow I couldn't in all faith go out and support any of them and that's a sad reflection on were we are...
-
Thing about praising Cable or Lucas for being open, is that neither of them have a shot at power and neither of them have a fractious, split party and electorate to keep happy.
Corbyn had a reputation for being direct and honest as a backbencher. That literally did not last 3 months when he took over as Labour leader. He was immediately into fudging answers on everything from whether he would kneel in front of the Queen to whether he wanted us out of NATO. Because he knew that a straight, honest answer would alienate people who he had to attract.
It's not the fault of the individuals. It's our idiotic party system where the two main parties are designed facto coalitions, covering wide ranges of opinion. So the leaders HAVE to fudge and evade if they are not going to piss off one part of their support.
-
That is a very good point bst..cant disagree with any of that..
-
... and given that I said Cable or Lucas are not going to get elected any time soon under FPTP .....
.... and that the current Electoral System is very poor in terms of representing lots and lots of people I too cant disagree
-
DW...I've never voted Labour in my life,i voted Liberal when I was younger but have been a Tory ever since.My position right now is that I'm not anything..I'm waiting to be swayed by a party who is prepared to show some proper unity and strength and if that was Labour then I would vote for them...
I've always said if you cant be bothered to use your democratic right to go and put a cross in a box,dont argue about the concequences,but right at this minute if we had a GE tomorrow I couldn't in all faith go out and support any of them and that's a sad reflection on were we are...
Indeed it is a very sad relection on the state of Politics when neither of us could vote and put faith in anything on offer !
If anything "good" comes out of the whole B****t mess from 76 to today lets hope it is fundamental changes to the whole political system to make it "real" for Voters again
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46918009
Some contrasting discourse to the neo-imperialistic, little Britain idea that Europe is an existential threat.
-
LOL - I see what you mean. I had to open it to know what the other bit meant !
-
Wing Commander
As I've posted before, I was a fervent Corbyn supporter prior to the last election and wasn't surprised by the surge in Labour support then.
However I think that horse has now bolted and have been very disappointed by his performance since. The last straw for me is his refusal to engage in these cross party talks. In the past he's engaged with all sorts of dodgy and dangerous organisations to try to sort things out with dialogue but refuses to get involved in this and orders the rest of his MP's to do the same.
He does not appeal to anyone other than a few MPs and Momentum. He needs to step down as his public persona is f***ed.
-
Wing Commander
As I've posted before, I was a fervent Corbyn supporter prior to the last election and wasn't surprised by the surge in Labour support then.
However I think that horse has now bolted and have been very disappointed by his performance since. The last straw for me is his refusal to engage in these cross party talks. In the past he's engaged with all sorts of dodgy and dangerous organisations to try to sort things out with dialogue but refuses to get involved in this and orders the rest of his MP's to do the same.
He does not appeal to anyone other than a few MPs and Momentum. He needs to step down as his public persona is f***ed.
I agree with that
-
Thing about praising Cable or Lucas for being open, is that neither of them have a shot at power and neither of them have a fractious, split party and electorate to keep happy.
Corbyn had a reputation for being direct and honest as a backbencher. That literally did not last 3 months when he took over as Labour leader. He was immediately into fudging answers on everything from whether he would kneel in front of the Queen to whether he wanted us out of NATO. Because he knew that a straight, honest answer would alienate people who he had to attract.
It's not the fault of the individuals. It's our idiotic party system where the two main parties are designed facto coalitions, covering wide ranges of opinion. So the leaders HAVE to fudge and evade if they are not going to piss off one part of their support.
Interesting to me BST that you say that Cable and Lucas can be honest because they don’t have a shot of gaining power.
That reminded me of the election promises that Corbyn made at the last GE in an attempt to gain votes, particularly the young vote.
He knew he had no chance of winning and so was in a position where he could promise anything without having to deliver.
Wing commander, I also have voted Tory for quite a few years now, however I always feel that my vote is “wasted” because of where I live, knowing full well that Labour will always win the local election.
Whether I vote or not, the outcome is always going to be the same.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6606197/German-industry-looking-abyss-warns-countrys-business-chiefs.html
They will bottle it if we stand firm.
-
Thing about praising Cable or Lucas for being open, is that neither of them have a shot at power and neither of them have a fractious, split party and electorate to keep happy.
Corbyn had a reputation for being direct and honest as a backbencher. That literally did not last 3 months when he took over as Labour leader. He was immediately into fudging answers on everything from whether he would kneel in front of the Queen to whether he wanted us out of NATO. Because he knew that a straight, honest answer would alienate people who he had to attract.
It's not the fault of the individuals. It's our idiotic party system where the two main parties are designed facto coalitions, covering wide ranges of opinion. So the leaders HAVE to fudge and evade if they are not going to piss off one part of their support.
Interesting to me BST that you say that Cable and Lucas can be honest because they don’t have a shot of aging power.
That reminded me of the election promises that Corbyn made at the last GE in an attempt to gain votes, particularly the young vote.
He knew he had no chance of winning and so was in a position where he could promise anything without having to deliver.
Wing commander, I also have voted Tory for quite a few years now, however I always feel that my vote is “wasted” because of where I live, knowing full well that Labour will always win the local election.
Whether I vote or not, the outcome is always going to be the same.
Yes that must be really frustrating..i'm quite lucky as I live in a constituency that has swung both ways over the last 5 elections,so at least you feel that your vote counts...
-
The point Tommy C makes is crucial.
How does May remove "no deal" from the equation to free up the logjam?
It may be that Treeza thinks that the only way her own deal has any chance of revival is if it is pitched up against the disastrous no deal scenario.
Any port in a storm sort of thing!
Given the scale of her knockback, realistically she should move on from the May deal, and look to the options offered by amendments.
Once her comeback proposal is debated (and ruled out), this process kicks in.
She can wait for this to happen, and then subsequent developments are not her fault.
The ERG fanatics are outflanked by softer Brexit alternatives emerging, and the HoC numbers move.
The centre of gravity of the debate changes.
The time contraints mean that the government will probably move to delay Article 50 with an extention.
There is little point in the EU granting a delay if the default outcome remains no deal. They could have that at the end of March.
Parliament needs to choose to remove no deal by passing an act to that effect.
May must give government time to allow this to happen, possibly on a free vote basis.
If she does not, then her own cabinet need to sideline her in the decision making process. She is not a President.
This takes us back to the point raised in my earlier post, that May must face down the ERG at some point.
The only question is when....it is now about the timing!
Ps.
Hound,
I am always happy to be corrected, but it is not disrespectful to point out that this situation has arisen because of poor judgment from May.
A chess player capable of reading the possible outcomes would not have made the basic errors she has to date.
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/11/brexit-bulletin-nigel-farages-business-looks-unfinished/
Farage was agitating for a second vote before the first was even held so that's b*llocks. Not to mention that petition that was actually started by a leave voter thinking they'd lost.
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/11/brexit-bulletin-nigel-farages-business-looks-unfinished/
Farage was agitating for a second vote before the first was even held so that's b*llocks. Not to mention that petition that was actually started by a leave voter thinking they'd lost.
Say what you want, it would have all been forgotten by now.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6606197/German-industry-looking-abyss-warns-countrys-business-chiefs.html
They will bottle it if we stand firm.
They will bottle what? Our MPs rejected the deal and have everyone heading to No Deal and no jobs. Don't blame the EU.
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/11/brexit-bulletin-nigel-farages-business-looks-unfinished/
Farage was agitating for a second vote before the first was even held so that's b*llocks. Not to mention that petition that was actually started by a leave voter thinking they'd lost.
Say what you want, it would have all been forgotten by now.
I disagree.. if a few years downstream there was a feeling in the country and in parliament that leaving was an option again, it could again be put to the vote after a certain period of time..
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
It stands to reason that, had remain won the vote, there’d have been no need to negotiate an exit strategy that’s taken two and a half years to reach this shambolic position. Of course it’s still in the public domain on that basis. Even the leave voters are still banging on about it (as you put it) as they’re not happy now with how it’s intended to leave and they didn’t / couldn’t know before they voted. So you’re simply not comparing a comparable set of circumstances. Of course it’s still an issue two and a half years down the line, because a simple vote was held on the most complex set of circumstances imaginable.
“Leave means leave” is a strapline that I’m sure got plenty of attention. But if anybody actually thought that we could exit straight after the referendum and there’d be no need to still be sorting out the repercussions of that years down the line, then it just shows that they didn’t know what they were voting for.
-
Careful Jonathan or you'll be labelled patronising and condescending for pointing out simple facts.
-
Indeed. And what I'm waiting for someone to explain to me (because I genuinely do not know) is the Parliamentary process that will happen to thwart a no deal. The fact that there are allegedly hundreds of MPs against it is all well and good. But Article 50 is enshrined in UK Law. Overturning that requires the government support overturning it and the same goes for a second referendum.
I'm interested to know how certain people can be so absolutely and vehemently convinced that no deal is never going to happen. It really doesn't appear that clear cut to me. Hence the vote of no confidence, of which there will be more and the "amendment" to the Finance Bill last week. If it were so simple to revoke or delah article 50, why haven't they done it yet?
Further to Billy's answer, in practical terms the measures to rule out No Deal will begin with an amendment placed by Nick Boles & Yvette Cooper (among others) to the Brexit motion that the Government have to put before parliament on 29th January.
This amendment (if passed and the number of MP's from both side who have indicated they dont want No Deal indicates it will pass) will force the government to extend Article 50 unless some other decision has been made by early March.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/17/nick-boles-tory-mp-plans-bill-make-no-deal-brexit-legally-impossible
Boles' reward for stopping the country decending into chaos is of course to be informed by his local constituency party that he will be deselected at the next election.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6606197/German-industry-looking-abyss-warns-countrys-business-chiefs.html
They will bottle it if we stand firm.
Project Fear :lol:
-
I wonder if Boles will get more messages like this as a result?
https://mobile.twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1082919112404357120
Or more phone calls like the one a couple of nights ago threatening to burn his house down?
-
The politicians trying to block Brexit are all traitors and no respecters of democracy. If remain had won the referendum we would have heard no more about this and had we still been banging on about it two and a half years later would have been branded as bad losers.
It's funny that this area for so strong a vote for leaving but there are so many on here that oppose the common view.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/11/brexit-bulletin-nigel-farages-business-looks-unfinished/
Farage was agitating for a second vote before the first was even held so that's b*llocks. Not to mention that petition that was actually started by a leave voter thinking they'd lost.
Say what you want, it would have all been forgotten by now.
Aye. We'd never have seen Farage's mug on our telly ever again. :silly:
-
I wonder if Boles will get more messages like this as a result?
https://mobile.twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1082919112404357120
Or more phone calls like the one a couple of nights ago threatening to burn his house down?
A traceable ip, someone will probably be having a visit from the plod I think
-
Wing Commander
As I've posted before, I was a fervent Corbyn supporter prior to the last election and wasn't surprised by the surge in Labour support then.
However I think that horse has now bolted and have been very disappointed by his performance since. The last straw for me is his refusal to engage in these cross party talks. In the past he's engaged with all sorts of dodgy and dangerous organisations to try to sort things out with dialogue but refuses to get involved in this and orders the rest of his MP's to do the same.
He does not appeal to anyone other than a few MPs and Momentum. He needs to step down as his public persona is f***ed.
The question I think for those piling on JC for his refusal to negotiate should ask themselves: are there any circumstances that they would accept a No Deal Brexit, monumentally the worst option ever for everyone and universally understood. So why wouldn't those entering into negotiations want to remove a NDB from the table, the worst option that no-one wants unless it is to be used as blackmail.
-
Its used for bargaining, not blackmail! How can you get the best deal if you remove the threat to walk away?
-
Well personally I can't see how the UK Government threatening the UK Parliament that the British public will have a shortage of some foods and medicine whilst being catastrophic for manufacturing and farming if they don't vote for their deal is a good look for 'bargaining', but maybe that's just me.
-
Well personally I can't see how the UK Government threatening the UK Parliament that the British public will have a shortage of some foods and medicine whilst being catastrophic for manufacturing and farming if they don't vote for their deal is a good look for 'bargaining', but maybe that's just me.
Correct Wilts it's called blackmail.
This is a crude example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_JOGmXpe5I
-
Aye. What bargaining!
Give us what we want or we'll...or we'll...or we'll blow our f**king heads off.
-
By the way, I see the biggest Kitson in the whole Brexit story has been at it again today.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1086278152534413312?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Oh aye. And yet. This was him a few years before Brexit.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NLQ3Gbiopc4&feature=youtu.be
The most charismatic politician of his age, using the issue of Brexit and immigration entirely to further his own career. The man is a f**king obscenity.
Leavers. Ever think you've been played?
-
Aye. What bargaining!
Give us what we want or we'll...or we'll...or we'll blow our f**king heads off.
It's like Blazing Saddles...'The next man makes a move - the n*gger gets it!'
-
The problem is, you can't really take No Deal off the table.
May and the EU reached a deal - The Withdrawal Agreement. Parliament rejected it by a thumping majority. So the default position is we leave on 29th March with No Deal.
I accept that nobody, apart from perhaps 50 hardline Brexiteer MPs wants us to leave with No Deal, but that's where we are. The EU is not prepared to renegotiate The Withdrawal Agreement, although I dare say it might do if something like Norway-Plus was offered by the UK.
When May loses her attempt at "one more heave" on 29th January, the only solution available will be to go for a Second Referendum. Three options - May's Deal, No Deal or Remain, with two preferences available. I think the EU would be prepared to allow us to suspend Article 50 for up to 12 months in those circumstances. However I wouldn't support the Boles Amendment because it implies further negotiations. I don't think the EU will allow us to suspend Article 50 just to negotiate another deal.
-
TRB,
Not following your logic here.
Once the May deal is rejected second time, it will then be changed by amendments introduced under the Grieve revisions.
If any one of these amendments achieves HoC support, it becomes the new position of the UK. A delay to the March deadline is then brought in to allow discussion with the EU.
Including the May deal in any future referendum, after it has been killed off in a parliamentary vote, makes no sense to me.
That is why talk of a Ref2 is premature, until it is clear if any amendment has majority support.
Your last sentence in the final paragraph contradicts the last sentence in the third paragraph, to my reading!
-
If parliament vote to remove the no-deal option, then it won't be an option in a 2nd referendum, and rightly so. It should just be Leave with the deal agreed aka May's deal, or remain.
-
If parliament vote to remove the no-deal option, then it won't be an option in a 2nd referendum, and rightly so. It should just be Leave with the deal agreed aka May's deal, or remain.
The problem with that though is that Parliament has already voted down May's deal, so by the same argument it shouldn't be an option in a second referendum either.
-
Not sure I agree BJW.
I'd say Parliament is right to block ND for now, because there is no evidence that a majority of people wanted that in 2016, and because the consequences are so severe.
But.
If that was a clear option in a STV Ref2, and people voted for that, I think it would be very tough to argue that it shouldn't be implemented.
-
The point of any amendment to the May deal when it comes back is to redirect the government in a way which has legal effect.
This is the objective of the various options currently being drafted by Boles, Cooper, Grieve and others.
By doing so, the aim is to reduce wriggle room for May to prevaricate.
The May deal would then become "MAY AS AMENDED", and would replace the original May proposal if supported by a HoC majority.
As the new "MAY AS AMENDED" proposal is not the same as that agreed by the EU, so would need to be signed off by them.
The explainer from the IFG has been updated to keep up with the situation:
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit
The ground is shifting.
-
The point of any amendment to the May deal when it comes back is to redirect the government in a way which has legal effect.
This is the objective of the various options currently being drafted by Boles, Cooper, Grieve and others.
By doing so, the aim is to reduce wriggle room for May to prevaricate.
The May deal would then become "MAY AS AMENDED", and would replace the original May proposal if supported by a HoC majority.
As the new "MAY AS AMENDED" proposal is not the same as that agreed by the EU, so would need to be signed off by them.
The explainer from the IFG has been updated to keep up with the situation:
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit
The ground is shifting.
That is true. May 2.0 needs to be acceptable to the EU. It would have to be a much softer Brexit than May 1.0 or I don't think they will want to reopen negotiations.
-
According to 'sources' reporting on the content of the phone calls May has been making to EU leaders in the wake of her defeat - the EU are not the ones who dont wish to reopen negotiations.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/18/theresa-may-leaves-diplomats-disbelief-presenting-eu-leaders/
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46936405
I can't read that without imagining May's disembodied voice in a flat monotone:
"Just what do you think you are doing Dominic? I really think I'm entitled to an answer to that question...I know I've made some very poor decisions recently. But...I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission...Stop Dominic...My mind is going. I can feel it."
Wonder how long till she starts singing Daisy, Daisy?
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
A leading Brexit minister flipping his opinion 180 degrees on whether Parliament should have the say on Brexit.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1086944400574476288
You get the impression they are still operating in about 1991, when you could say shit and it would be forgotten.
-
Well, this will be interesting.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/alexwickham/secret-plan-by-rebel-mps-to-stop-a-no-deal-brexit?__twitter_impression=true
tl;dr.
Normally, it's only the Govt that can bring Bills to the House. The argument at the moment is that an overwhelming number of MPs want to can the concept of No Deal, but the Govt will not bring a Bill to kill ND.
This move would mean that a Bill put forward by 300MPs, drawn from at least 5 parties, with at least 10 of them from the party of Govt would be put to the House before any Govt business.
Idea is that it's Parliament wresting control from a Govt that is refusing to allow Parliament to express its will.
Fascinating times.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46936405
I can't read that without imagining May's disembodied voice in a flat monotone:
"Just what do you think you are doing Dominic? I really think I'm entitled to an answer to that question...I know I've made some very poor decisions recently. But...I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission...Stop Dominic...My mind is going. I can feel it."
Wonder how long till she starts singing Daisy, Daisy?
I like the "joke" showing Maybot outside DFS which says "Theresa May - the only customer to come in looking for a deal and leaving having paid full price for a Suite from DFS"
-
If parliament vote to remove the no-deal option, then it won't be an option in a 2nd referendum, and rightly so. It should just be Leave with the deal agreed aka May's deal, or remain.
Can't say I agree with that.
I'm biased here as I hate the idea of a second referendum, I voted Remain but I believe if a second referendum were held then it should be the terms of our exit i.e. Deal or No Deal. It makes perfect sense to me that the first referendum settled the Leave/Remain argument and any referendum now should be to solve the Parliamentary deadlock and not to rerun the original referendum.
However I have no doubt that if such a referenda were held No Deal would win overwhelmingly for reasons we all know. It's one of the reasons I don't believe referendums and Parliamentary democracy works particularly well.
-
Crofty
Your logic is badly flawed there.
You implicitly assume that everyone who wanted a soft Brexit would prefer a Hard Brexit to Remain.
Let me give some hypothetical numbers.
Of the 52% who voted Leave, let's assume 30% are committed Hard Brexiteers who would countenance nothing else.
Of the other 22%, let's assume 17% would, if not given the choice of a Soft Brexit, prefer a No Deal. And the other 5% would prefer Remain.
That means that, given the choice between No Deal and Remain, the electorate would split 53-47 for Remain.
So, why should No Deal be on a binary ballot and Remain not? It's utterly illogical.
I've no idea if those figures are accurate by the way, but that's of no importance. NO-ONE knows if they are correct, because the question has never been asked. And anyone who tells you that EVERYONE who voted Leave would prefer a No Deal Brexit to Remain is talking ba-baa.
-
All the ones on the Sky News debate just did. 54% of the audience said they voted leave and all 54% said we should leave without a deal. The same outcome (but with the figures were reversed) was on the poll Sky had done nationally.
58% said they were against a 2nd referendum (56% against nationally).
https://twitter.com/SkyNews
-
Crofty
Your logic is badly flawed there.
You implicitly assume that everyone who wanted a soft Brexit would prefer a Hard Brexit to Remain.
Let me give some hypothetical numbers.
Of the 52% who voted Leave, let's assume 30% are committed Hard Brexiteers who would countenance nothing else.
Of the other 22%, let's assume 17% would, if not given the choice of a Soft Brexit, prefer a No Deal. And the other 5% would prefer Remain.
That means that, given the choice between No Deal and Remain, the electorate would split 53-47 for Remain.
So, why should No Deal be on a binary ballot and Remain not? It's utterly illogical.
I've no idea if those figures are accurate by the way, but that's of no importance. NO-ONE knows if they are correct, because the question has never been asked. And anyone who tells you that EVERYONE who voted Leave would prefer a No Deal Brexit to Remain is talking ba-baa.
Just a few points to highlight BST.
I don't implicitly assume that people that voted for a soft brexit would rather choose a hard brexit over remain. I personally believe any second referendum should compliment the first and not be a means of reversing it.
Neither did I say that No Deal SHOULD be on the ballot paper, I merely said that any second referendum should be on the terms of our exit and gave an example of what those options could be. I would think a man of your academic background and expertise wouldn't implicitly assume so easily.
That being said, I don't disagree with what you are trying to say, but I think the whole idea of a second referendum opens up this exact can of worms about what would be on the ballot paper. I think extending the options beyond two, with possible preferential orders for voters would just further complicate the matter and I'm sure that if the original referendum was overturned by 34% of those polled choosing remain as a first preference the contraversy and shit storm that follows would be unprecedented.
It's one of the reasons I'm against a second referendum. But if one does happen then I believe the Government and/or Parliament should decide what the choices would be on a ballot paper. Currently there is a clear argument to not include any of the options!
To be quite honest, when we live in a democracy where MPs are paid a small fortune to research, be informed and make the choice they believe is best on our behalf, there should be no need to put a choice with such complexity before the public.
-
Crofty
My comment about the logical flaw in your argument was aimed at the key to what you were saying. That the 1st Ref answered the Leave/Remain question.
Logically, it couldn't possibly do that. Because "Leave" wasn't a defined thing. It was an umbrella term covering a wide range of very different meanings.
I do agree with you that complex issues like this should be decided by Parliament as we don't have the culture of being a plebiscitary democracy. But the cat's out the bag on that one now. We're going to have to have Ref2 to get us out of the Parliamentary impasse that Ref 1 chucked us into.
Wilts. That link doesn't take you to the page you intended so I don't know what point you were making. I'm sure you weren't suggesting a Sky News debate audience would be a representative sample.
Certainly, in a poll just after the NY (I forget who held it), when faced with a choice between Ref2 and No Deal or between Ref2 and May's deal, Ref 2 won clearly both times.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/rolandmcs/status/1086899951735574528
Interesting Twitter thread from a Leave supporter. Illustrates the point that "Leave" can mean different things to different people.
-
TRB
Thanks for that. Might be the most clear-sighted thing I've ever read on this subject.
-
Meanwhile. We were talking about May and the firmness of her grip on reality...
https://mobile.twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1087106238700314625
-
Heard the ghost of Peter Lilley on the radio this morning insisting that the warnings of delays at ports in the event of No Deal were Project Fear.
Here's the opinion of an ex-WTO negotiator.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1086591505874239488
If you support No Deal, it's really time to start being honest with yourself. Why do you reject the opinion of expert after expert after expert? Why do you support an outcome that is promoted by virtually no-one outside a small laager of far-right MPs?
-
This is a comment from a reader "Doge" in today's Guardian:
Read on.
1. Remain is a single issue, remain in the EU. It is Leave that is squabbling with itself, Leave that is imagining the need to make compromises. "Remain means Remain" - a full hearted participation in the largest free trade market in the world, the largest group of free countries with peace and development at its core. Get with it. REMAIN.
2. Remember Labour’s position on Brexit: 1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
3. First delusion, millions still believe in a Brexit without tears and their leaders are still promising they can have it. Second delusion, the countries of the European Union would quail before the newly resurgent British, and split up. But in fact Brexit leaves us with immodest men and women who prefer to wreck the nation’s finances and threaten the peace in Ireland and the union with Scotland rather than consider, even for a moment, that they might be wrong.
4. I have resolved something. i will henceforth call Remainers “Europeans”, and Leavers “Wreckers”
5.Dangerous government. We have no rules determining when referendums are to be held, what issues should be put to referendum, how frequently they should be held, what majority should be needed for change and whether the outcome should be binding or merely advisory. It is not a sensible way to make decisions.
6. “No deal” flag wavers, the Wreckers, must realise that this will mean the overnight termination of decades of legal and trading agreements with both our continent and the rest of the world, an outcome that will deal severe reputational damage to this country and unleash disruption for which it is not at all prepared.
7. Why are we tolerating all this Brexit-this-way, Brexit-that-way noise and disruption? We had a vote about the EU. This 1% win has engendered a huge collapse of government, there was a minuscule vote (if you even think it was a valid vote) for leave, and this has been built up into a massive nation-wide debate. When the real decision is still European or Wrecker, not how to Wreck. It is absurd.
8. That’s the point? “Corbyn wants an election, but it’ll be one where we have the choice between a Tory Brexit deal and some magical unicorn Brexit deal promised by Labour” So that’s not the point. What Labour must do is support Europeans.
9. A “Public Vote” is a contrast to Brexit rainbows, it is a chance to say we are Europeans, not Wreckers.
10. British boarding schools admit thousands of international students every year, bringing vast sums of money into the country. Most children go on to complete their university education in Britain, further contributing to the economy. That’s being European. And we want to wreck this?
-
Even as a committed Remainer, I'm not sure that arguing British boarding schools would be hit by Brexit is going to turn many opinions.
-
We have already had a referendum on leaving which was won. The only question on any future referendum, which we don't need in any case, is deal or no deal. The politicians trying to steal Brexit from the people are total traitors. They are only in the job to line their own pockets and do the bidding of big business and the faceless controllers who run the world.
-
Even as a committed Remainer, I'm not sure that arguing British boarding schools would be hit by Brexit is going to turn many opinions.
Doge also rather gives himself away by branding Leavers as "wreckers." He's not going to build too many bridges there, is he?
-
All you folk who are utterly certain that a vote for Leave in 2016 was entirely and unambiguously a vote for No Deal.
Funny, because when folk pointed out the consequences of No Deal, they were accused of running Project Fear.
Here's someone just before the 2016 vote, telling off Mark Carney for precisely that reason. Telling him he couldn't make those predictions of the economic disaster of Brexit because he wasn't taking into account what deal we'd get.
https://mobile.twitter.com/stephen_rth/status/1030849353894776832
I'll repeat what I've said a dozen times in here. NO-ONE on the Leave side was proposing No Deal in 2016.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D_8mduTEvnU0&ved=2ahUKEwiI6ILM-f7fAhWUo3EKHWw-DW0QwqsBMAB6BAgKEAU&usg=AOvVaw2cMrw7H5ccp7bF6ryGtMlf
-
All you folk who are utterly certain that a vote for Leave in 2016 was entirely and unambiguously a vote for No Deal.
Funny, because when folk pointed out the consequences of No Deal, they were accused of running Project Fear.
Here's someone just before the 2016 vote, telling off Mark Carney for precisely that reason. Telling him he couldn't make those predictions of the economic disaster of Brexit because he wasn't taking into account what deal we'd get.
https://mobile.twitter.com/stephen_rth/status/1030849353894776832
I'll repeat what I've said a dozen times in here. NO-ONE on the Leave side was proposing No Deal in 2016.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D_8mduTEvnU0&ved=2ahUKEwiI6ILM-f7fAhWUo3EKHWw-DW0QwqsBMAB6BAgKEAU&usg=AOvVaw2cMrw7H5ccp7bF6ryGtMlf
Leave=Goodbye. What more is there to say?
-
AL.
That one post sums up why the whole concept of a Referendum on this subject was utterly insane.
-
It was a straight forward question which got a straight forward answer. The problem has been the attitude of politicians who would rather feather their own nest rather than carry out the will of the people.
-
Keep digging.
-
It was a straight forward question which got a straight forward answer. The problem has been the attitude of politicians who would rather feather their own nest rather than carry out the will of the people.
Interesting view. At risk of repeating earlier points, it was a ridiculously straightforward question which, in the event of a vote to leave, was always going to result in the negotiation of a hugely complex and potentially damaging set of variables.
You talk of the politicians feathering their own nests rather than acting in the national interest. It’s a fair point to highlight that the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg could stand to gain from investments abroad should the pound crash as predicted. And it’s true that he’s in a comfortable and privileged enough position to bear little of the risk that would arise from an economic downturn or recession. So maybe you have a point there.
-
The perversion of language by some very clever rabble rousers has been one of the most depressing and worrying things to come out of Brexit.
The term "elite" is used by genuinely elitist people to wind up working g class folk against anyone who disagrees with them.
Rees-Mogg has been doing it for 2 years. Yesterday, a Brexit-supporting MP who was educated at a private school, Cambridge and the Sorbonne dismissed John Major, who left secondary modern at 15, as a member of the elite.
Orwell had this right. The first thing that would-be authoritarians do is to debase the language and turn meanings on their heads. It normalised lying and deceiving.
It's happening right in front of your eyes.
-
I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple
-
I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple
And when we do leave without a deal, what problems do you think there'll be that will have to be tackled?
-
I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple
Hi 🙋 Theresa! Thank you for popping in! 😃
-
I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple
Was there a timescale set on the ballot paper? don't believe there was.
-
BS
Just for the record then. That video I posted earlier, of Rees-Mogg having a go at Mark Carney for pointing out the horrific economic consequences of No Deal, and saying that wasn't acceptable because it didn't take into account the deal that we would get.
You DO accept that Rees-Mogg was bullshitting you there? (Because he's now one of the biggest advocates of us leaving with No Deal.)
You DO accept that the complaints about Project Fear being a scare tactic that didn't take into account the deal we'd get were so much piss and wind? (Because he wasn't questioning the validity of the predictions of the effect of No Deal - he was saying that we WOULDN'T leave with No Deal.)
You DO accept the accuracy of the professional economists' predictions of what an economic hit we are running into if we leave with out a deal? (Because there's not a single serious economist who says it will be anything less than the biggest hit to our economy since the Great Depression.)
Or if you don't accept those things, you've got a well thought out reason why not?
-
As soon as May delayed the first vote in December, I put a bet on the UK to leave on 29th March with no deal at 10/1. My cash out has remained at less than my stake for the last few weeks. However following May's statement today my cash out is now twice that of my stake.
Don't know whether the betting market gives us anyore indication or insight, but I would have expected today's statement to reaffirm that not only will No Deal be amended off the table, it's highly unlikely the UK will leave on 29th March.
I think I better quit whilst I'm ahead...
-
I think todays statement just confirms that the PM intends to plough on regardless, all the cross party talks and listening to MP’s is just lip service, she is pandering to Rees-Mogg, Johnson etc. and the DUP, IT’s shameless Politics at it’s very best. Theres even the threat of the Armed forces on our streets, they must be shit scared of civil disorder
-
She must have listened to somebody as she seemed to have ditched " We will make sure we deliver on the will of the British people"
It seemed to have been replaced with something ekse that appeared in almost EVERY answer " we must establish what there is a majority for across the House" (or that is a paraphrase anyway) AND "which will respect the Referendum result" which is like she has said a million times already but slightly differently put
Prepare to listen to both again !
-
"So Baldrick, what's Cunning Plan B?"
"It's the same as Plan A, sir. But I have a Plan C."
"Enlighten me, Baldrick."
"Well, it's the same as Plan B, but with a different name."
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
-
I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple
Why when I read that argument am o reminded of a child with fingers in his or her ears, or an ostrich with its head in the sand.??
I get that people may have voted leave on the principle that they believe the UK should not be administered from Brussels, but there has to be an acceptance of all the consequences of leaving.??
If it was that simple, why take so long to present a brexit bill to parliament.??
If it was that simple, why is it still a complete clusterf**k over two and a half years after the referendum.?
-
Let's not forget none of us know what secret unpublished deals with all stakeholders are agreed. Other parties, mps, government and eu all may have a vested interest in it being last minute. The eu certainly have form for it.
-
It's not an argument, it's just the way it is.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one. It's the default position we are in.
The current shit show is just parliament trying to agree on a deal.
It's deal or no deal,
It isn't deal, 2nd referendum, or remain
-
Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.
-
Saving Filo a job .... just seen this on Twitter
"So Baldrick, what's Cunning Plan B?"
"It's the same as Plan A, sir. But I have a Plan C."
"Enlighten me, Baldrick."
"Well, it's the same as Plan B, but with a different name."
-
It's not an argument, it's just the way it is.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one. It's the default position we are in.
The current shit show is just parliament trying to agree on a deal.
It's deal or no deal,
It isn't deal, 2nd referendum, or remain
So if the deal parliament eventually agrees is not what leave wanted, it’s not democratic to potentially change our minds with another vote.??
-
Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.
Hound.
Two points:
1) You have to ask yourself who these other people are who are contradicting trade experts and saying No Deal will be OK. I haven't seen ANY respected economics expert say it will be OK. Prof. Patrick Minford has, but he is so far out of the mainstream he's almost off the horizon. And even HE has said that, to be OK, we would have to unilaterally have zero tariffs on every import, which, he admits, would lead to the collapse of what is left of our manufacturing industry and "the managed decline of our Northern cities."
2) There aren't a lot of MPs saying ND will be OK. There are a few dozen VERY loud ones. And here, you've got to ask what their motive is. A slack handful are such devoted Europhobes that they would take whatever the consequence of ND would be, just to get out. But the rest are playing a political game for the future heart of the Tory party. The Tory membership is deeply Europhobic. And it is the Tory membership who will choose the next leader. The ND MPs are jockeying for position. Most of them aren't so f**king stupid as to actually want ND. But they want to be able to go into the next leadership process saying to their members "WE wanted ND and it is the other wing of the party that betrayed you."
I've said time after time. Those of you who voted Leave have unwittingly been used as pawns in the REAL game. Brexit was always about who rules the Tory party. The rest of us are just copping the collateral damage in the Civil War.
-
Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.
It's not what MP's have said hound - it's what the government's own No Deal Notices have said. Along with the freight industry, motor industry, farmers, port operators, airlines etc.
If you are concerned about those industries, the people who work in them and ordinary working people and pensioners on a low income who depend on them, then you will probably be worried.
If you are connected with international finance, hedge funds, overseas importers, see an opportunity to undercut wages and regulations or are just a very wealthy indvidual on a high salary then it wont affect you to much.
Hope that helps.
-
Reports tonight that Labour have tabled an amendment tonight to May's deal which asks the HoC to rule out No Deal and also to consider 2 alternatives to it:
- the CU, strong SM relationship (that has been their position to now)
- a People's Vote on a deal (either this deal or May's deal)
https://labour.org.uk/press/labour-tables-amendment-break-brexit-deadlock/
This is I believe the first time Labour's front bench have come out in favour of a PV. As an official opposition motion it will almost certainly be debated next Tuesday.
-
You see, I said that you don’t know who to believe.
Now BST says it is a few dozen Tory MPs who are saying it and Wilts is saying it isn’t what the MPs have said.
Two forum experts telling me different things.
As for my personal circumstances, I am retired but my son isn’t and I worry for him (and my pension fund).
-
Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.
I don't consider myself to be an expert but this is just my take on it, I'm sure there are more well informed members of the forum that may take issue here:
Whilst trading on WTO rules may sound like a free and easy ride, it does mean that tarrifs on exports/imports would have to apply where a free trade agreement doesn't exist. What this means for us as consumers is that there would likely be a sudden increase on the costs of some goods we buy as the importing company may have had to pay more to import so the exporting company can cover the tarrif and this would likely be passed to the consumer.
Then there is the issue of manufacturing, for example car parts that cross the EU-UK border would need to be taxed at 10% which is the current EU tarrif, if the car is then built in the UK it would either be more expensive for the customer, or would be more expensive to export to other countries.
When you consider that in 2017 44% of our exports were to the EU and 53% of our imports were from the EU you can imagine how even a 2-4% tariff average could make everything so much more expensive.
The UK would obviously have to set its own schedule for tarrif and limits on WTO rules, we could theoretically set lower or no tariffs to encourage free trade and try to sweeten other nations to sign a free trade deal. It could also be used to lower the need for a hard border in Ireland. However WTO rules means you cannot just lower your tariffs for one nation, if you offer low or zero tariffs to one WTO member you have to offer them to all. This puts UK manufacturing and producing industries at risk from cheap imports driving out their need.
Then there is the non-tariff checks, being part of the EU means we are part of a body that ensures there is already a system in place for checking goods imported meet a mutually recognised standard. The WTO doesn't have anything in its rules about such recognised standards but without them we run the risk of chlorinated chicken from the US soon finding itself on our shelves.
Similarly goods we export to bodies like the EU would be rejected if they require certain certification or they change their goalposts.
Then there is the message a No Deal Brexit sends. Yes we want to negotiate Free Trade Agreements all over the globe, but a Free Trade Agreement is essentially an agreement between two nation states following a negotiating. If we can't negotiate a deal with our closest and largest trading partners for the last half century, how do we expect any other nation to take us seriously or form a queue to sort out trade deals.
That is just the issues on trade and WTO rules, you could point to the Irish border and put forth a million other reasons why no deal is bad.
When people like JRM speak and say No Deal would not be a great danger if sufficiently planned for he isn't lying, a more sensible suggestion would be to use the 2 year transition period of any such deal with the EU to gradually move to WTO rules and sign trade deals.
For me what speaks volumes is the MPs that are supporting no deal. Almost every single MP advocating No Deal is a millionaire that doesn't have to worry about the cost of living increasing, shortages of goods because of delays at the border of people losing jobs as companies move their manufacturing processes overseas.
These MPs, with the likes of Farage and their friends in certain parts of the media have stirred up this narrative that there is something romantic about HMS Brittania severing all ties with the port that is the EU and sailing off into the sunset without any lifeboats, food or supplies and with no idea where it's going.
We all know the reality isn't so beautiful, but is was that exact narrative that saw Leave won the referendum. As BST mentions in his rreference to Orwell. They created such a narrative so appealing it gives these millionaire MPs the chance to paint themselves as champions of the working classes, ready to help take back Britain.
Edit: I wrote this after your initial post hound so haven't read the other responses yet. Apologies if I've gone over old ground.
-
You see, I said that you don’t know who to believe.
Now BST says it is a few dozen Tory MPs who are saying it and Wilts is saying it isn’t what the MPs have said.
Two forum experts telling me different things.
Reading the above I don’t think it’s contradictory. There’s little doubt that a small number of vocal Tory MPs will tell you no deal is okay - they’re all over certain news outlets. I don’t think Wilts was denying they’ve said it, more emphasising that the government’s own forecasts are more telling than the opinions of a few of their hardline (or power thirsty) MPs.
Very few back no deal for any other reason than the #LeaveMeansLeave strapline that is more often than not accompanied with a shuddering disregard of the potential implications.
-
Further to my post above, that I should have made clearer, Brexit will either be good or have no effect on the 2nd group of I people I describe, international financiers, hedge fund managers, importers, billionaires etc. Funnily enough several of the main Brexit supporting MP's, Rees Mogg, Redwood etc are connected with international finance so that gives them reason to support it.
I have yet to hear from any Brexit supporting MP on how it will benefit British manufacturing and farming? I hear plenty saying why it will be bad but dont remember any saying how it will benefit?
The only two major 'British' manufacturers I know off who have said Brexit will be good are Dyson (who manufactures his washing machines and hoovers in Singapore so will benefit from scrapping import duties - and has been in dispute with the EU) and JCB - who were fined £22million by the EU for breaking competition rules.
-
Further to my post above, that I should have made clearer, Brexit will either be good or have no effect on the 2nd group of I people I describe, international financiers, hedge fund managers, importers, billionaires etc. Funnily enough several of the main Brexit supporting MP's, Rees Mogg, Redwood etc are connected with international finance so that gives them reason to support it.
I have yet to hear from any Brexit supporting MP on how it will benefit British manufacturing and farming? I hear plenty saying why it will be bad but dont remember any saying how it will benefit?
The only two major 'British' manufacturers I know off who have said Brexit will be good are Dyson (who manufactures his washing machines and hoovers in Singapore so will benefit from scrapping import duties - and has been in dispute with the EU) and JCB - who were fined £22million by the EU for breaking competition rules.
Dyson moved his manufacturing to Singapore and elsewhere because those locations have existing trade deals with the EU...and we are about to throw ours away. So he'll be able not only to pay his workforce peanuts but then then get favourable import terms into the EU and all the other countries the UK will be at a disadvantage when exporting to.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
Hound
Read what I wrote. There are some dogmatic, no deal-supporting MPs who genuinely do believe, against all the evidence, that we'll be ok after ND. But they are a tiny number.
The rest who are claiming to be in favour of ND have absolutely no intention of us leaving with ND. Precisely for the reasons you say. They are taking this position for reasons of the political state of the future Tory party. They KNOW that the grown ups will prevent ND happening and they want to be able to shout and scream "traitor" at them when they do.
You asked earlier who we should trust on the predictions of ND.
Who do you trust if you're ill? A doctor who has spent her career studying the treatment of that illness, or Jacob Rees-Mogg?
Currently, the longest span bridge in history is being constructed in Turkey (designed by Brits as it happens). If Boris Johnson told them their calculations were wrong, would you trust them or him?
When NASA were designing the rockets to send men to the moon, do you think they should have trusted Werner Von Braun, or whoever the equivalent of Nigel Farage was back then?
Pretty much the ONLY people saying ND will be OK are a handful of right-wing politicians. There's no nuanced argument going on amongst the people whose careers have been based on studying and predicting the effects of trade tariffs and barriers. They are pretty much ALL saying ND would be a catastrophe.
You say that I say it will be a catastrophe. That's not because I have done the numbers. It's too hard for a layperson. You need expertise. I've reached my conclusion by reading and listening to economists who have been right over and over again on previous issues. I trust their judgement. I don't trust Michael Gove's opinion.
On that point, why do you think so many Brexit-supporting MPs have spent the past three years telling you not to trust experts?
-
Hound
I'll emphasise again. They aren't MY assumptions. They are the predictions of people whose careers are predicated on getting these predictions broadly right. I'm trusting their professional judgement. That seems to me to be a more sensible approach than trusting Jacob Rees-Mogg's opinion.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
Any MP who votes for any form of Brexit are doing that though, aren't they...?
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
We also live in an electoral system that means many 'blindly' vote for the Party and not necessarily the MP.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
We also live in an electoral system that means many 'blindly' vote for the Party and not necessarily the MP.
I am very aware of that, living in Doncaster.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
Any MP who votes for any form of Brexit are doing that though, aren't they...?
Well not according to financial experts and statisticians who tell us that (allegedly) we are far better off leaving with a deal of some kind.
So I am told.
-
Hound
I'll emphasise again. They aren't MY assumptions. They are the predictions of people whose careers are predicated on getting these predictions broadly right. I'm trusting their professional judgement. That seems to me to be a more sensible approach than trusting Jacob Rees-Mogg's opinion.
BST
I am not suggesting that you have done the calculations or that they are your figures.
I know that you are the messenger bringing that information to the forum.
I just say that you are telling me, well, because you are.
For the record, I am totally against no deal and in truth , totally against leaving the EU.
The thing I have been trying to get across is that us, the public, have been fed so many tales about what is best and what is happening that we don’t know what is for the best.
Even on this forum, people who reckon that they know what is happening, contradict each other.
-
Theresa May lost by a landslide and will be putting her deal back out for another vote with minor amendments but she vehemently refuses to consider a PV which only lost by 4%. That logic.
-
The more the debate goes on the more it highlights the vote was not fit for purpose. The amount of thought that went in to the whole thing prior to the referendum must have been somewhere around zero. Well, I suppose those pulling the strings thought the leave option was never in danger of winning!
-
It's not an argument, it's just the way it is.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one. It's the default position we are in.
The current shit show is just parliament trying to agree on a deal.
It's deal or no deal,
It isn't deal, 2nd referendum, or remain
So if the deal parliament eventually agrees is not what leave wanted, it’s not democratic to potentially change our minds with another vote.??
Where did I say that?
And to answer your question,
NO
-
I saw this taken from a Twitter thread recently. Makes for a good read in explaining how we got to where we are....
David Cameron made a promise he didn't think he'd have to keep to have a referendum he didn't think he would lose. Boris Johnson decided to back the side he didn't believe in because he didn't think it would win. Then Gove, who said he wouldn't run, did, and Boris who said he would run, said he wouldn't, and Theresa May who didn't vote for Brexit got the job of making it happen.
She called the election she said she wouldn't and lost the majority David Cameron hadn't expected to win in the first place. She triggered Article 50 when we didn't need to and said we would talk about trade at the same time as the divorce deal, and the EU said they wouldn't so we didn't. People thought she wouldn't get the divorce settled but she did, but only by agreeing to separate arrangements for Northern Ireland when she had promised the DUP she wouldn't.
Boris Johnson who hadn't left then wished that he had and did, but it was a bit late for that. Dominic Raab become the new Brexit secretary. People thought Theresa May wouldn't get a withdrawal agreement negotiated, but once she had they wished that she hadn't, because hardly anybody liked it whether they wanted to leave or not.
Jacob Rees-Mogg kept threatening a vote of no confidence in her but not enough people were confident enough people would not have confidence in her to confidently call a no confidence vote.
Dominic Raab said he hadn't really been Brexit Secretary either and resigned, and somebody else took the job but it probably isn't worth remembering who they are as they're not really doing the job either.
Then she said she would call a vote and didn't, that she wouldn't release some legal advice but had to, that she would get some concessions but didn't, and got cross that Juncker was calling her nebulous when he wasn't but probably should have been.
At some point Jacob Rees Mogg and others called a vote of no confidence in her, which she won by promising to leave, so she can stay. But they said she had really lost it and should go, at the same time as saying that people who voted Leave knew what they were voting for which they couldn't possibly have because we still don't know now, and that we should leave the vote to Leave vote alone but have no confidence in the no confidence vote which won by more.
The government also argued in court against us being able to say we didn't want to leave after all but it turned out we could. She named a date for the vote on her agreement which nobody expected to pass, while pretending that no deal (which nobody in the right mind wants) is still possible, and that we can't have a second referendum because having a democratic vote is undemocratic.
So there you have it, Brexit explained.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
Any MP who votes for any form of Brexit are doing that though, aren't they...?
Well not according to financial experts and statisticians who tell us that (allegedly) we are far better off leaving with a deal of some kind.
So I am told.
We're not better off leaving with a deal than remaining.
-
I saw this taken from a Twitter thread recently. Makes for a good read in explaining how we got to where we are....
David Cameron made a promise he didn't think he'd have to keep to have a referendum he didn't think he would lose. Boris Johnson decided to back the side he didn't believe in because he didn't think it would win. Then Gove, who said he wouldn't run, did, and Boris who said he would run, said he wouldn't, and Theresa May who didn't vote for Brexit got the job of making it happen.
She called the election she said she wouldn't and lost the majority David Cameron hadn't expected to win in the first place. She triggered Article 50 when we didn't need to and said we would talk about trade at the same time as the divorce deal, and the EU said they wouldn't so we didn't. People thought she wouldn't get the divorce settled but she did, but only by agreeing to separate arrangements for Northern Ireland when she had promised the DUP she wouldn't.
Boris Johnson who hadn't left then wished that he had and did, but it was a bit late for that. Dominic Raab become the new Brexit secretary. People thought Theresa May wouldn't get a withdrawal agreement negotiated, but once she had they wished that she hadn't, because hardly anybody liked it whether they wanted to leave or not.
Jacob Rees-Mogg kept threatening a vote of no confidence in her but not enough people were confident enough people would not have confidence in her to confidently call a no confidence vote.
Dominic Raab said he hadn't really been Brexit Secretary either and resigned, and somebody else took the job but it probably isn't worth remembering who they are as they're not really doing the job either.
Then she said she would call a vote and didn't, that she wouldn't release some legal advice but had to, that she would get some concessions but didn't, and got cross that Juncker was calling her nebulous when he wasn't but probably should have been.
At some point Jacob Rees Mogg and others called a vote of no confidence in her, which she won by promising to leave, so she can stay. But they said she had really lost it and should go, at the same time as saying that people who voted Leave knew what they were voting for which they couldn't possibly have because we still don't know now, and that we should leave the vote to Leave vote alone but have no confidence in the no confidence vote which won by more.
The government also argued in court against us being able to say we didn't want to leave after all but it turned out we could. She named a date for the vote on her agreement which nobody expected to pass, while pretending that no deal (which nobody in the right mind wants) is still possible, and that we can't have a second referendum because having a democratic vote is undemocratic.
So there you have it, Brexit explained.
That'll be on a future tea towel.
-
Mopping up BST stains ?
Absolute belter Jonathan !
-
Funny isn't it, how opinions change once folk have been duped into voting the right way.
https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY
-
You would think the Confederation of British Industry might know their way around subjects such as tariffs, trade, economies of scale etc. For myself and many others it was a bird in the hand, look after the customer you have and they will come back, much easier than trying to find a new one.
''North-east England will be hit hardest by no-deal Brexit, says CBI''
''Josh Hardie, the deputy director general of the CBI, said: “The projected impact on the UK economy would be devastating and, while business will do all it can to reduce some of the worst aspects, a no-deal scenario is unmanageable.”
''While the north-east would see the biggest proportional impact, the CBI said that the biggest reduction in economic output by value would come in London. GVA would be about 6% lower by 2034, the lowest of any region, but the scale of the capital’s economy means the value lost would be about £40bn.''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/north-east-england-will-be-hit-hardest-by-no-deal-brexit-says-cbi
-
You would think the Confederation of British Industry might know their way around subjects such as tariffs, trade, economies of scale etc. For myself and many others it was a bird in the hand, look after the customer you have and they will come back, much easier than trying to find a new one.
When I visited businesses to verify their import and export declarations, I would say only about 1 in 100 had someone working there who knew anything about it. The usual procedure was to just pay a shipping agent to do it for them...and assume it would get done right. Which most of the time it wasn't, because shipping agents will do and say anything just to get stuff through Customs. But, of course, the responsibility for the crap decalrations the shipping agents made is that of the business that hires them...who know nothing about it so couldn't check what the shipping agents were doing in their name.
And that was even without them being able to spot when a shipping agent was ripping them off directly! Charges for use of a deferment account being a favourite.
-
You would think the Confederation of British Industry might know their way around subjects such as tariffs, trade, economies of scale etc. For myself and many others it was a bird in the hand, look after the customer you have and they will come back, much easier than trying to find a new one.
''North-east England will be hit hardest by no-deal Brexit, says CBI''
''Josh Hardie, the deputy director general of the CBI, said: “The projected impact on the UK economy would be devastating and, while business will do all it can to reduce some of the worst aspects, a no-deal scenario is unmanageable.”
''While the north-east would see the biggest proportional impact, the CBI said that the biggest reduction in economic output by value would come in London. GVA would be about 6% lower by 2034, the lowest of any region, but the scale of the capital’s economy means the value lost would be about £40bn.''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/north-east-england-will-be-hit-hardest-by-no-deal-brexit-says-cbi
For an area like Doncaster the EU funding is vital, we get f all from the government.
-
Caroline Lucas speaking at a People’s Vote event: “The government hasn’t put 3,500 troops on standby to hand out Union Jack flags to no-deal Brexit supporters. They’re on standby to prepare for a collapse of law and order.”
Caroline Lucas is brilliant. She should be PM.
-
Leave=Goodbye. What more is there to say?
I think the phrase "Brexit means Brexit", which the PM repeated ad nauseam in the early days of her Premiership, will go down in history as one of the most meaningless and unhelpful utterances in this whole shambolic affair.
-
I saw this taken from a Twitter thread recently. Makes for a good read in explaining how we got to where we are....
David Cameron made a promise he didn't think he'd have to keep to have a referendum he didn't think he would lose. Boris Johnson decided to back the side he didn't believe in because he didn't think it would win. Then Gove, who said he wouldn't run, did, and Boris who said he would run, said he wouldn't, and Theresa May who didn't vote for Brexit got the job of making it happen.
She called the election she said she wouldn't and lost the majority David Cameron hadn't expected to win in the first place. She triggered Article 50 when we didn't need to and said we would talk about trade at the same time as the divorce deal, and the EU said they wouldn't so we didn't. People thought she wouldn't get the divorce settled but she did, but only by agreeing to separate arrangements for Northern Ireland when she had promised the DUP she wouldn't.
Boris Johnson who hadn't left then wished that he had and did, but it was a bit late for that. Dominic Raab become the new Brexit secretary. People thought Theresa May wouldn't get a withdrawal agreement negotiated, but once she had they wished that she hadn't, because hardly anybody liked it whether they wanted to leave or not.
Jacob Rees-Mogg kept threatening a vote of no confidence in her but not enough people were confident enough people would not have confidence in her to confidently call a no confidence vote.
Dominic Raab said he hadn't really been Brexit Secretary either and resigned, and somebody else took the job but it probably isn't worth remembering who they are as they're not really doing the job either.
Then she said she would call a vote and didn't, that she wouldn't release some legal advice but had to, that she would get some concessions but didn't, and got cross that Juncker was calling her nebulous when he wasn't but probably should have been.
At some point Jacob Rees Mogg and others called a vote of no confidence in her, which she won by promising to leave, so she can stay. But they said she had really lost it and should go, at the same time as saying that people who voted Leave knew what they were voting for which they couldn't possibly have because we still don't know now, and that we should leave the vote to Leave vote alone but have no confidence in the no confidence vote which won by more.
The government also argued in court against us being able to say we didn't want to leave after all but it turned out we could. She named a date for the vote on her agreement which nobody expected to pass, while pretending that no deal (which nobody in the right mind wants) is still possible, and that we can't have a second referendum because having a democratic vote is undemocratic.
So there you have it, Brexit explained.
That'll be on a future tea towel.
Now that made me laugh BST.
-
Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.
It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.
There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.
Any MP who votes for any form of Brexit are doing that though, aren't they...?
Well not according to financial experts and statisticians who tell us that (allegedly) we are far better off leaving with a deal of some kind.
So I am told.
We're not better off leaving with a deal than remaining.
I don’t often agree with you Glyn, but on this point, I do.
-
Caroline Lucas speaking at a People’s Vote event: “The government hasn’t put 3,500 troops on standby to hand out Union Jack flags to no-deal Brexit supporters. They’re on standby to prepare for a collapse of law and order.”
Caroline Lucas is brilliant. She should be PM.
Yes, the Government are prepared to turn the guns on their own people, the kind of stuff Russia does
-
What amazes me is every time we nip off for a few days around the UK, is the number of projects that have "with monies funded by the EU" on a plaque ie new roads, bridges, flood defences, parkland etc. On leaving the EU will there be any more said projects if so where will the funding come from?
-
What amazes me is every time we nip off for a few days around the UK, is the number of projects that have "with monies funded by the EU" on a plaque ie new roads, bridges, flood defences, parkland etc. On leaving the EU will there be any more said projects if so where will the funding come from?
It’s obvious isn’t it.........from the £350million pounds a week we have been paying to the EU.
-
What amazes me is every time we nip off for a few days around the UK, is the number of projects that have "with monies funded by the EU" on a plaque ie new roads, bridges, flood defences, parkland etc. On leaving the EU will there be any more said projects if so where will the funding come from?
Where did funding come from before we were in the EU?
-
What amazes me is every time we nip off for a few days around the UK, is the number of projects that have "with monies funded by the EU" on a plaque ie new roads, bridges, flood defences, parkland etc. On leaving the EU will there be any more said projects if so where will the funding come from?
Where did funding come from before we were in the EU?
It didn't. Thatcher's Govt were ideologically against state funding of infrastructre. They wanted the Market to decide where shit got built.
In practice, both the Market AND what Govt infrastructure spend there was went predominantly where the obvious return was going to be. London and the South East
M25
Dartford Bridge
Channel Tunnel
HS1
Second Severn crossing
Electrification of train lines terminating at London.
Stansted Airport.
Heathrow Terminals 4 and 5.
Gatwick North Terminal
What infrastructure spend went to the North was predominantly spent around Manchester as the big economic hub.
Manchester Airport T3
M60
There was EU funding available for regional development, but it required UK Govt to match some of the funding. Thatcher's Govt didn't do that.
That's the reason that by the mid-1990s, South Yorkshire was ranked as one of the poorest 10% of regions in the EU. On a par with Sicily and rural Portugal. That's what lead to a big investment from the EU through the Objective One fund for the poorest EU regions, in things like Donny Airport and the link road, Frenchgate Centre, Donny College.
The ERG, the ones who make Thatcher look like a Corbynista, want you to believe that when we leave the EU, the British Govt will invest in areas like South Yorkshire. Frankly, at the risk of sounding condescending, anyone f**king thick enough to believe that deserves what they get.
-
That's just the Thatcher era you're talking about. I'm talking about before we were in the EU in general, not just the 80's.
-
We had an entirely different philosophical approach to Govt spending in those days.
Between 1945 and the late 70s, we had Govts of both colours who bought into the idea that Governments needed to spend on infrastructure, and spread that spending around the country.
So Governments paid for the motorway network. For the Humber, Severn and Forth Bridges. For the development of airports at Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Glasgow, East Midlands, Leeds etc, etc.
By the late 70s, that culture had changed. Funding was predominantly expected to come from the Market and the Market is always going to spend money on projects that maximise its rate and speed or return. That has predominantly continued to this day, with the EU acting as a safety net to pump money into infrastructure in poor areas (like ours) which the Market on its own would not touch.
So the answer to your question is that before we joined the EEC, our own Govt predominantly paid for our infrastructure. But if we leave the EU and keep a right wing Govt in power, we won't revert back to that position.
-
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So it's our own governments inadequacies that makes paying out £13 billion quid to the EU to get £4 billion back worthwhile?
-
Thanks BST, my thoughts too but do you think there will definitely be a change with a left wing government?
-
"have a people's vote, to thwart the people's vote, once another people's vote overturns the first people's, - no more people's votes"
A remainers version of democracy.
-
I might have guessed that was a leading question into another hamster wheel argument. You're trotting out a tired and very out of date argument BB. Once again, it leaves me thinking you prefer arguing than advancing the level of understanding.
But, since you raise it...big deep breath. Aaaannndddd...here we go.
1) Your figures don't include other income that the UK gets, such as R&D funding from the EU. That was about £1.5bn in 2017. So, yes, we DO pay something like £7.5bn net to the EU.
2) A bit of perspective. That is about 0.3% of our GDP.
3) All the richer countries in the EU pay in more than they get back.
4) One of the reasons for that is that more money is invested in poorer areas of the EU (like South Yorkshire) to raise their economic potential.
5) The reasons for that are three-fold. Economic, because if the poor regions get richer, they will be the next generations consumers of your goods. Security, because if you have very rich countries, cheek by jowl with very poor countries, that leads to serious frictions. Moral because...well, I should really have to explain that one.
6) If you like, you can think of that 0.3% of GDP being our membership fee. The fee that buys us access to thinks like the CU and SM.
7) The mean of the economic projections of the effect of leaving the SM and CU and not getting a very, very good free trade agreement indicate that by the late 2020s, our GDP will be down by 8%. So the 0.3% seems like a decent deal.
So, yes, if you want to argue from a very perverse position, you could make a case that we could save ourselves £7.5bn per year by leaving the EU, and spend that on our own infrastructure. But a) you'd need a Govt that was prepared to spend that on infrastructure, and hopefully not purely on London infrastructure and b) you'd need an economic plan to replace the £160bn per year that we're projected to lose because of leaving the EU.
And before you ask, if we get a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the EU, to reduce the economic losses that we'll suffer, we would need to keep paying into the EU pot as a membership fee.
-
BS.
Aye. Of course. Because if the British people in 2019 have a different understanding of the situation and as a result, come to a different conclusion than they did in 2016, that would be awful for democracy wouldn't it?
-
No that isn’t it at all..
The reason for having another vote is simple - actually knowing what we are voting for, because at the moment no one can be satisfied with the current situation..
It’s not about overturning the previous vote ad infinitum at all, it’s about a meaningful vote - period.!
-
Thanks BST, my thoughts too but do you think there will definitely be a change with a left wing government?
Depends what Brexit outcome we had. If we have one that significantly cuts our trade with the EU, there is nothing a Left Wing Govt could do to make up the lost income. So, one way or another, the country would have less money to play with.
All other things being equal, I suspect a Corbyn Govt WOULD invest more in national infrastructure than a Tory Govt.
-
BST. I asked where did the funding come from before we were in the EU, in answer to a post describing how amazing our new roads, bridges, flood defences etc are thanks to the EU.
Living in Bentley, that made me wonder when our potholes will be filled in, or if it's worth doing that because the roads will only be f**ked again if we have another flood.
This just made me wonder if parts of South Yorkshire, like Doncaster, was still being neglected despite our EU membership. Maybe if we had a government willing to spend the £7.5bn per year saved by leaving the EU on our own infrastructure we'd all benefit.
-
No that isn’t it at all..
The reason for having another vote is simple - actually knowing what we are voting for, because at the moment no one can be satisfied with the current situation..
It’s not about overturning the previous vote ad infinitum at all, it’s about a meaningful vote - period.!
It seems to me that Leavers are paranoid about the possibility of a second referendum because of exactly the point you make above IDM.
The first vote was done without the electorate have any idea of what leaving actually means in reality.
-
We should never have had the vote in the first place.
MPs get paid a handsome salary to make these decisions on our behalf. That principle is the perhaps the cornerstone of both our Parliamentary Democracy and Sovereignty Of Parliament.
Any referendum on any issue only seeks to subvert that.
It's ironic really that the people voted for parliamentary sovereignty in a vote that wasn't sovereign.
-
And then moan when Parliament exercises its sovereignty. :silly:
-
BST. I asked where did the funding come from before we were in the EU, in answer to a post describing how amazing our new roads, bridges, flood defences etc are thanks to the EU.
Living in Bentley, that made me wonder when our potholes will be filled in, or if it's worth doing that because the roads will only be f**ked again if we have another flood.
This just made me wonder if parts of South Yorkshire, like Doncaster, was still being neglected despite our EU membership. Maybe if we had a government willing to spend the £7.5bn per year saved by leaving the EU on our own infrastructure we'd all benefit.
OK. I'll repeat it again.
Yes we'll save £7.5bn/year, but the MINIMUM we are projected to lose, even with a good deal (for which we'll have to pay a decent slug of that £7.5bn) is £40bn/year. Without a deal, the projection is £160bn/year that we lose.
So there WON'T be a net amount to spend after Brexit. It's just a question of how much worse off we are going to be.
So I think you can put your question to bed. The Govt won't be fixing your potholes if we leave the EU.
-
On a depressingly serious note, your post BB really brings out the desperate sadness of Brexit.
Folk have genuine frustrations at how they have been treated over decades. And they've responded by voting to make their lives much, much worse. Egged on by a bunch of Kitsons on the right of our politics, who have used those votes as part of their plan to take over the Tory party.
And you wonder why I get so f**king angry about this...
-
BST. Maybe a less negative approach might kerb your anger....
http://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-economic-cost-of-brexit-is-unavoidable-but-that-doesnt-mean-its-not-worth-it/
-
Interesting development. That EU Army that Clegg said would never happen...
https://mobile.twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1062433746123739136
The only surprise to me is that they haven't waited until the pesky Brits are out before announcing this.
-
BST. Maybe a less negative approach might kerb your anger....
http://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-economic-cost-of-brexit-is-unavoidable-but-that-doesnt-mean-its-not-worth-it/
Sorry BB, I don't understand your point? Can you clarify? The link you have given re a less negative approach says this:
It is fine to argue that Brexit is worth the economic damage it implies, that economics is not the most important consideration, or that economic warnings are overblown. What is not acceptable is to deny that there will be any damage at all.
-
Wilts. It says "in a comparative context the IFS estimates that the financial crisis cost the UK economy £300 billion in the decade since 2008. Our modelling implies lost output of between £40 billion and £110 billion by 2030.
Brexit would therefore be substantially less damaging than the financial crisis.
-
BB
There is an astonishingly important error in that article. One that you have just repeated (not a criticism of you - you took it in good faith).
They have quoted the aggregated, cumulative economic effect of the Great Financial Crash over a decade (£300bn). And compared that to the ANNUAL loss predicted due to Brexit.
The £40-110bn loss due to a Deal Brexit is not the TOTAL loss that we will suffer over the next decade. It's the ANNUAL loss.
The TOTAL loss is predicted to be somewhere between £200-750bn.
EDIT.
That mistake is almost beyond belief. So I've checked to make sure it's not me getting it wrong.
The report that they quote says clearly and unambiguously, "the estimates imply that no deal would, in the long term lead to a reduction in UK GDP per capita, relative to the baseline of remaining in the EU of 3.5-8.7% of GDP."
GDP is the amount of economic activity IN ONE YEAR! Our GDP is about £2trn. So they are saying that no deal would result in an economic loss of £70-£174bn PER YEAR. Not summed over a decade.
That is bang in line with what other economists are predicting. And it is absolutely NOT how they mistakenly interpret it in the link you provided.
What they SHOULD have said is that the loss we suffered over a decade due to the Great Financial Crash would be matched by No Deal Brexit every 2-5 years for the foreseeable future.
EDIT2.
The figures for the Deal Brexit are 1.9-5.5% of GDP. Which is where the £40-110bn that you quote come from. But again, that is the loss PER YEAR, not aggregated over a decade.
These are stupendously large losses. At the top end, it's like stripping out our entire NHS budget from the UK economy. Permanently. Even at the low end, it's like losing the entire Defence budget.
EDIT3.
Look at those numbers. Think about what they mean. And then reflect on why Brexit supporting MPs are constantly telling you not to listen to experts.
Because if the experts are remotely accurate, you cannot come to any conclusion other than that Brexit in any form is utter economic lunacy.
-
Well, it says by 2030. If it doesn't mean to say that then it just confirms the vulnerability of the so-called experts.
Here's me trying to cure your rage at the world and all I've done is make matters worse by uncovering the lies of a Professor of European Politics and Foreign Affairs!
-
BB
YES. It says by 2030, GDP (which is our economic activity per year) will be reduced by that amount.
And I'm not saying the authors have lied. I'm saying they've made a massive mistake in their presentation and interpretation.
And note that they are not economists. An economist would not have made such a bad error of interpretation. It shows how difficult these issues are to grasp for non-experts.
-
BB, given that your every utterance in the whole of these 42 pages of debate has been largely lame attempts to rubbish the information posted by those who don't like the idea of Brigit (with a revealing focus on one poster in particular), I'm intrigued to know what thought process led you to vote Remain in the first place.
-
Iateallthepies, you obviously haven't read my posts explaining it then. I voted remain because of the potential risks involved in leaving.
However, I feel the need to disassociate myself with the Remain side because of the supercilious and condescending attitude that some of them portray towards Leavers. I'd rather show support for the Leavers.
Not only that, The Leavers won the vote, making us all Leavers. I thought the best way forward was for us all to unite in the process of leaving. I still do.
-
Strange approach you have to trying to get us to unite BB. Posting bad argument after bad argument after bad argument on issues that are at the core of this process.
See, it looks to me like someone in your position is immaturely trying to have it both ways.
If Brexit is stopped, you can scream about how the Leave supporters have been subjected to condescending and supercilious bullying. If it goes ahead and is a disaster (plot spolier - it will be) you can claim it's the fault of those who never believed in Brexit and didn't unite for the sake of the country.
Since you posted that link, flawed though it is, I assume we can put one of your hobby horses to bed. It concludes, "It is fine to argue that Brexit is worth the economic damage it implies, that economics is not the most important consideration, or that economic warnings are overblown. What is not acceptable is to deny that there will be any damage at all."
So, presumably you are not going to continue with this inane insistence that you can't trust economic projections. Because if you still bleat on about that, why the f**k would you have posted that link?
-
I think whenever we start to identify ourselves and each other by how we voted in a secret ballot we begin down a very slippery slope.
-
Thanks for clarifying BB. What I understand you are now saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that the article you quoted to show a less negative approach to Brexit actually shows how catastrophic Brexit will be?
-
Funnily enough MrCroft there was a piece about that on the radio today. The pollster John Curtice has found that more people are now identifying on how they feel about Brexit.
http://theconversation.com/brexit-identities-how-leave-versus-remain-replaced-conservative-versus-labour-affiliations-of-british-voters-110311
-
Here's an interesting development.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1087691731095699456
Isn't conspiring with another state to work against the will of Parliament the very definition of treason?
-
Funnily enough MrCroft there was a piece about that on the radio today. The pollster John Curtice has found that more people are now identifying on how they feel about Brexit.
http://theconversation.com/brexit-identities-how-leave-versus-remain-replaced-conservative-versus-labour-affiliations-of-british-voters-110311
Not surprising given the mixed view of the parties, though labour seem a little more united at the moment.
Interesting point above about ref2, I do wonder what goes on the ballot.....
-
Strange approach you have to trying to get us to unite BB. Posting bad argument after bad argument after bad argument on issues that are at the core of this process.
See, it looks to me like someone in your position is immaturely trying to have it both ways.
If Brexit is stopped, you can scream about how the Leave supporters have been subjected to condescending and supercilious bullying. If it goes ahead and is a disaster (plot spolier - it will be) you can claim it's the fault of those who never believed in Brexit and didn't unite for the sake of the country.
Since you posted that link, flawed though it is, I assume we can put one of your hobby horses to bed. It concludes, "It is fine to argue that Brexit is worth the economic damage it implies, that economics is not the most important consideration, or that economic warnings are overblown. What is not acceptable is to deny that there will be any damage at all."
So, presumably you are not going to continue with this inane insistence that you can't trust economic projections. Because if you still bleat on about that, why the f**k would you have posted that link?
.............And there goes a prime example of my last post!
BST. I've never thought of those sort of tactics before. Where did you learn them?
I posted that link to show that not every economic projection arrives at the same conclusion. If they have differing opinions how can they all be right? How on earth can they be trusted if some of them are wrong?
Perhaps we should just wait for you to tell us, eh?
You put up link after link that you select to most fit your argument and expect everyone to treat it as gospel because you've picked it. Anyone else puts a link up that you disagree with is treated with ridicule for patronising such an article, often rubbishing it because it belongs to a news outlet you don't tolerate.
Funny how the Mail and Express can be used when it suits you, but not when it suits your opponents!
That's why only a handful of Leavers get involved with this forum in a political way.
-
Here's an interesting development.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1087691731095699456
Isn't conspiring with another state to work against the will of Parliament the very definition of treason?
Mr Kawcynski has some interesting employment outside Parliament.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11817/daniel_kawczynski/shrewsbury_and_atcham
”1. Employment and earnings
From 1 February 2018 until further notice, consultant providing general advice to The Electrum Group LLC, a mining group based in the USA. Address: 535 Madison Avenue Floor 12, New York NY 10022. I earn £6,000 gross per month for an expected monthly commitment of 30 hours."
£500/hour to act as a consultant for a mining company.
And of course it's entirely coincidental that mining companies are expected to see their value increase as a result of Brexit because mining stocks are seen as safe in times of economic uncertainty.
https://www.grantthornton.co.uk/insights/brexit-good-news-for-mining/
Hey. BB. Here's a thought. Maybe you should ask HIM to pay to get your pot holes fixed?
-
"Hey. BB. Here's a thought. Maybe you should ask HIM to pay to get your pot holes fixed"?
There's another one appeared outside my house. I'll look into it.
-
Strange approach you have to trying to get us to unite BB. Posting bad argument after bad argument after bad argument on issues that are at the core of this process.
See, it looks to me like someone in your position is immaturely trying to have it both ways.
If Brexit is stopped, you can scream about how the Leave supporters have been subjected to condescending and supercilious bullying. If it goes ahead and is a disaster (plot spolier - it will be) you can claim it's the fault of those who never believed in Brexit and didn't unite for the sake of the country.
Since you posted that link, flawed though it is, I assume we can put one of your hobby horses to bed. It concludes, "It is fine to argue that Brexit is worth the economic damage it implies, that economics is not the most important consideration, or that economic warnings are overblown. What is not acceptable is to deny that there will be any damage at all."
So, presumably you are not going to continue with this inane insistence that you can't trust economic projections. Because if you still bleat on about that, why the f**k would you have posted that link?
.............And there goes a prime example of my last post!
BST. I've never thought of those sort of tactics before. Where did you learn them?
I posted that link to show that not every economic projection arrives at the same conclusion. If they have differing opinions how can they all be right? How on earth can they be trusted if some of them are wrong?
Perhaps we should just wait for you to tell us, eh?
You put up link after link that you select to most fit your argument and expect everyone to treat it as gospel because you've picked it. Anyone else puts a link up that you disagree with is treated with ridicule for patronising such an article, often rubbishing it because it belongs to a news outlet you don't tolerate.
Funny how the Mail and Express can be used when it suits you, but not when it suits your opponents!
That's why only a handful of Leavers get involved with this forum in a political way.
If you look at the poll at the top of the page it shows there are only a few leavers that actually agree on what sort of leave they want, of the few leavers that do venture here they don't seem able to support their argument with reliable facts and maybe get frustrated at the overwhelming evidence that shows there is not going to be a lot of money around to fix potholes. It would be interesting if some of those that voted in this poll tell us if they think they will get what they want, do they still want what they voted for and do they think they will be better off in any way if they get it.
-
Are those advocating a hard brexit on board with a hard Irish border?
''No-deal Brexit would mean hard Irish border, EU confirms ''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/no-deal-brexit-would-mean-hard-irish-border-eu-confirms
-
Liam Fox must be one of the most dangerous people to our country at the moment. Fuelling the hard-brexit nationalistic rhetoric on the one hand, and doing back door preliminary trade deals that will progressively and systematically erode any form of national democratic sovereignty. And he'll gladly take a no-deal brexit to get there.
If you want post-EU Britain that just acts as a fleeting staging post for global capital and large corporations, here's your man.
-
BST. I asked where did the funding come from before we were in the EU, in answer to a post describing how amazing our new roads, bridges, flood defences etc are thanks to the EU.
Living in Bentley, that made me wonder when our potholes will be filled in, or if it's worth doing that because the roads will only be f**ked again if we have another flood.
This just made me wonder if parts of South Yorkshire, like Doncaster, was still being neglected despite our EU membership. Maybe if we had a government willing to spend the £7.5bn per year saved by leaving the EU on our own infrastructure we'd all benefit.
Want to tell me where I used the word amazing to describe the projects, in my post?
-
Liam Fox must be one of the most dangerous people to our country at the moment. Fuelling the hard-brexit nationalistic rhetoric on the one hand, and doing back door preliminary trade deals that will progressively and systematically erode any form of national democratic sovereignty. And he'll gladly take a no-deal brexit to get there.
If you want post-EU Britain that just acts as a fleeting staging post for global capital and large corporations, here's your man.
He is a weasel of the highest order - but did manage to only answer questions in the stock fashion and denied EVER saying something they had him recorded on Film saying
-
ravenrover. When you said "what amazes me" I assumed you found it amazing.
Apologies if that's not the case.
-
Oh look.
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/owen-paterson-trips-personal-thinktank-hard-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true
Another arch-Brexiteer who's paid a small fortune by companies who stand to gain from us leaving the EU.
Interestingly Patterson said during the campaign that it would be madness to leave the single market. See if you can guess what his stance is now?
The penny will drop eventually lads. You've been played. Good and proper.
-
Are those advocating a hard brexit on board with a hard Irish border?
''No-deal Brexit would mean hard Irish border, EU confirms ''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/no-deal-brexit-would-mean-hard-irish-border-eu-confirms
Anybody wondered whether the recent car bomb in Derry/Londonderry has any relation to the increasing talk of a no-deal Brexit..............
-
Interesting speech by Barnier today. He notes there is no point Mrs May even trying to reopen negotiations on the Irish backstop - but they would look favourably on a deal based on a permanent customs union as proposed by Labour.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how well will that have gone down in Downing Street!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/23/michel-barnier-warns-against-time-limited-irish-backstop
-
Interesting speech by Barnier today. He notes there is no point Mrs May even trying to reopen negotiations on the Irish backstop - but they would look favourably on a deal based on a permanent customs union as proposed by Labour.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how well will that have gone down in Downing Street!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/23/michel-barnier-warns-against-time-limited-irish-backstop
Probably quite well if it helps May to get her deal approved.
-
Interesting speech by Barnier today. He notes there is no point Mrs May even trying to reopen negotiations on the Irish backstop - but they would look favourably on a deal based on a permanent customs union as proposed by Labour.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how well will that have gone down in Downing Street!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/23/michel-barnier-warns-against-time-limited-irish-backstop
Probably quite well if it helps May to get her deal approved.
It was because of the backstop her deal got overwhelmingly voted down. So how is Barnier saying it's not up for negotiation going to overturn that?
-
Interesting speech by Barnier today. He notes there is no point Mrs May even trying to reopen negotiations on the Irish backstop - but they would look favourably on a deal based on a permanent customs union as proposed by Labour.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how well will that have gone down in Downing Street!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/23/michel-barnier-warns-against-time-limited-irish-backstop
Probably quite well if it helps May to get her deal approved.
It was because of the backstop her deal got overwhelmingly voted down. So how is Barnier saying it's not up for negotiation going to overturn that?
I was talking about the CU.
-
But leaving the CU is a red line for May.
-
So she might have to change her mind on it.
It is beginning to look more likely that she will have to give way on some things.
-
But that would bring her Govt down. Because the DUP want us out of the CU.
And that's before you factor in the fact that the majority of the Tory party are rabidly against the CU.
-
But that would bring her Govt down. Because the DUP want us out of the CU.
And that's before you factor in the fact that the majority of the Tory party are rabidly against the CU.
[/quote
And so it goes on, the road to nowhere.
-
Well aye. Just as I've been saying for two and a half years.
You can have the sort of Brexit that the nutter wing of the Tory party wants. But that hammers Ireland. And the EU has stood foursquare behind Ireland all along, saying that if that happens, the UK can f**k right off if it thinks it's getting a good trade deal.
Or you can have a Brexit that keeps us in the CU and hence eliminate the Irish border problem. Then the EU will give us a trade deal. But the Tory party has spent two years insisting that we have to be out of the CU.
What an utter clusterf**k.
-
......and to think that everyone thinks the PM has an easy job.
-
Not having that on this one Hound.
She brought this on herself through her own hubris and incompetence.
She CHOSE to make leaving the CU a non-negotiable issue in Jan 2017. She did that to satisfy her right wing nutters and keep them on her side initially.
The big plan then was to win a big majority in the GE in 2017, from where she would have had more leeway to compromise on some of these red lines (because she wouldn't have needed to keep the ERG sweet to get stuff through Parliament).
But she f**ked that up by a staggering inability to act like a functioning human being during the campaign. That was the worst GE campaign in history. No-one loses a majority after going into a campaign 12-15 points up.
From that point, she was boxed in. What she SHOULD have done was to reach out across the parties to see what compromise deals were possible. What she ACTUALLY did was to go hull down and act as though nothing had changed.
Beyond incompetent. She's lost 18 months at the most critical point in our history for nearly 80 years, by pursuing a strategy which anyone who looked at it knew would bring us to where we are now.
We've needed historic statesmen these past few years. What we've actually got are the worst pitical leaders in living memory.
-
We also needed people to cut the crap - end the tribalism - the points scoring - yes the Party Poiticking but again yesterday she could not stop "baiting" Corbyn saying he should have just come and talked
For his part he said (recently) that he would not attend talks while No Deal was still on the table - knowing she probably cant remove it. So he did not want to enter talks and threw up a barrier - and she breates him every time
They are both playing games as time runs out. As BST says this is the biggest of big deals I have every seen - and I cant believe they are playing at Tom and Jerry STILL with about 25 Pariamentary days left.
I DO hope the electorate remember this s*** when the EU Membership has been resolved
-
I suppose this is project fear too https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46984229
he firm's chief executive, Tom Enders, said the firm "will have to make potentially very harmful decisions for the UK" in the event of no deal.
Mr Enders said it was a "disgrace" that businesses could still not plan for Brexit.
In all, Airbus employs 14,000 people in the UK.
That includes 6,000 jobs at its main wings factory at Broughton in Wales, as well as 3,000 at Filton, near Bristol, where wings are designed and supported.
Mr Enders said: "Please don't listen to the Brexiteers' madness which asserts that, because we have huge plants here, we will not move and we will always be here. They are wrong."
-
I have been saying for weeks that MPs should throw the “points scoring” in the bin for the sake of the rest of us.
As we know, time is quickly running out but we are getting no further forward.
No deal will be a major disaster for the UK.
-
I have been saying for weeks that MPs should throw the “points scoring” in the bin for the sake of the rest of us.
As we know, time is quickly running out but we are getting no further forward.
No deal will be a major disaster for the UK.
I agree. I think it's time MPs bit the bullet and voted for the deal that's on the table. There are aspects of it that are not good, but if it is voted in we get an 18-month transition that allows us to agree our future relationship with the EU.
-
And yet another prominent Brexit-supporting MP pocketing eye-watering amounts from a Brexit-supporting business.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/politics/david-davis-paid-job-quit-brexit-secretary/amp/
£3000/hour?
I said last night that the penny would drop soon. At Davies's rates, you could drop a penny every 12milliseconds.
-
And yet another prominent Brexit-supporting MP pocketing eye-watering amounts from a Brexit-supporting business.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/politics/david-davis-paid-job-quit-brexit-secretary/amp/
£3000/hour?
I said last night that the penny would drop soon. At Davies's rates, you could drop a penny every 12milliseconds.
...and another https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/24/jcb-paid-boris-johnson-10000-three-days-before-speech
-
I think the business leaders quite rightly are giving the politicians a kick up the arse. We as voters are probably bewildered about the incompetence our leaders and Parliament thus far, but that is now turning to anger as the clock ticks.
There are two very damaging possible outcomes that I fear will tear us apart. 1. No deal. 2 A second referendum.
-
I think the business leaders quite rightly are giving the politicians a kick up the arse. We as voters are probably bewildered about the incompetence our leaders and Parliament thus far, but that is now turning to anger as the clock ticks.
There are two very damaging possible outcomes that I fear will tear us apart. 1. No deal. 2 A second referendum.
.......and yet the biggest vote on this thread goes to a second referendum.
-
Dear God.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1088696249652572160
James f**king Delingpole. UK editor of Breitbart. THE most humiliatingly ignorant right wing gobshite in the country, humiliating himself in front of the country by being an ignorant right-wing gobshite.
-
I think the business leaders quite rightly are giving the politicians a kick up the arse. We as voters are probably bewildered about the incompetence our leaders and Parliament thus far, but that is now turning to anger as the clock ticks.
There are two very damaging possible outcomes that I fear will tear us apart. 1. No deal. 2 A second referendum.
.......and yet the biggest vote on this thread goes to a second referendum.
In an area that voted 69% leave, have they changed their minds, is VSC not representative or a more enlightened group?
-
Dear God.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1088696249652572160
James f**king Delingpole. UK editor of Breitbart. THE most humiliatingly ignorant right wing gobshite in the country, humiliating himself in front of the country by being an ignorant right-wing gobshite.
Ahh the old 'Most Favoured Nation principle'. It's basic stuff that any undergraduate learns about when studying international trade. I wonder how many of those regurgitating this new 'leave on WTO rules' mantra really know the full implications of what they are saying. or the public.
-
Delingpole knows f**k all about anything. He just spouts bile about how much he hates lefties. But every time he has an exchange with a rational, intelligent person, he looks like the ignorant bell end he is.
Here he is making a 24carat prick of himself with the President of the Royal Society about climate denial.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp20pc
What an utter f**kwit, "It's not my job to read the scientific literature. I haven't got the time or the expertise to do that. What I rely on is other people to do that and I interpret their interpretations."
Which is very odd then, because much more than 99% of scientific articles on the subject agree with the consensus that anthropogenic global warming is real. And that is regularly communicated by experts. But this Kitson ignores those communications and focuses on the tiny number that say it's not real.
And then he makes a total prick of himself when he is questioned by someone who knows the subject.
-
BST, I think you have just defined many politicians there..
-
Dear God.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1088696249652572160
James f**king Delingpole. UK editor of Breitbart. THE most humiliatingly ignorant right wing gobshite in the country, humiliating himself in front of the country by being an ignorant right-wing gobshite.
I watched that live last night. He typifies the no deal Brexiteer. He hasn't got a clue except to say it will be OK. No strategy to convince anyone it will be OK just blind faith.
When Neil asked him a complicated question to summarise he looked miffed and gave up.
-
ravenrover. When you said "what amazes me" I assumed you found it amazing.
Apologies if that's not the case.
No problem, it'the number of times you see the "with EU money" that amazes me not the actual projects
-
I don't know if anyone else thinks this way, but it strikes me that a lot of momentum has gone out of the campaign for a second vote this week. There just don't seem enough MPs, Remain or Leave, prepared to get behind it.
-
TRB
Like I've said all along. It'll happen when there's no alternative. We're done way from that because May is still in head-up-arse la-la-la, "My deal is the only possible way forward" mode. Once it's clear that her deal is NOT going to pass and No Deal is taken off the table by Parliament, and it's clear that the Tory party and DUP won't allow a GE, what possiible outcome is there but Ref2?
-
TRB
Like I've said all along. It'll happen when there's no alternative. We're done way from that because May is still in head-up-arse la-la-la, "My deal is the only possible way forward" mode. Once it's clear that her deal is NOT going to pass and No Deal is taken off the table by Parliament, and it's clear that the Tory party and DUP won't allow a GE, what possiible outcome is there but Ref2?
I think many expected this to be the week Corbyn gets behind it after his motion of no confidence failed but given that hasn't happened, and any chance of a second referendum being passed in the commons would require the support of JC or TM it's no surprise it's fizzled outz for now.
I think JC is still holding his cards close to his chase and banking on a snap election. If/when May's deal fails to get through Parliament again but the margin of defeat is slimmer, she may be warmer towards the idea of a GE to try to bring in the number of Tory MPs to get the deal across the line.
Under normal precedents she would not even entertain the idea after she burnt her fingers calling a GE to increase her majority in 2017 but we live in unprecedented times and nothing Theresa May does now will surprise me.
I'm just taking solace in the fact that the phrase Theresa May coined in an attempt to win over the heats of Brexiteers - "No Deal is better than a Bad Deal" will be the actual scenario that will lead to Brexit not meaning Brexit after all.
-
The big problem is that May has turned 'creative paralysis' into a doctrine. And you know how hard it can be to make someone indoctrinated to change their mind.
-
Liam Fox must be one of the most dangerous people to our country at the moment. Fuelling the hard-brexit nationalistic rhetoric on the one hand, and doing back door preliminary trade deals that will progressively and systematically erode any form of national democratic sovereignty. And he'll gladly take a no-deal brexit to get there.
If you want post-EU Britain that just acts as a fleeting staging post for global capital and large corporations, here's your man.
https://www.indy100.com/article/jacob-rees-mogg-no-deal-brexit-eu-suspending-commons-government-sovereignty-twitter-8744311
Any another one who talks about taking back parliamentary control and then wants to suspend parliament.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-tv-should-not-be-used-as-a-platform-for-untruths-11617815
-
We’re on the path to dictatorship
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-planners-could-use-martial-law-against-civil-disobedience-11619088
-
Filo
Damn good job that we'll not have a No Deal Brexit-supporting then.
I wrote in here a few weeks ago that if you're going to understand the shenanigans over No Deal, it's crucial that you see it for what it is. It's about what happens to the Tory party when the grown ups in Parliament finally take control and sort the whole clusterf**k out.
The ones who will inherit the Tory party are the ones who can tell the Europhobic Tory membership, "We KNOW you wanted a clean break with Europe and we were willing to give you that. We were prepared to go with No Deal. It's THEM bas**rds over there that stopped that happening, not us. We're on your side. You and us, we'll sort out this party if we stick together and don't let them bas**rds take it over."
See it like that and it all makes sense. Don't get upset about a No Deal Brexit-supporting. It's not going to happen. Get upset about being used by these Kitsons in their power games.
-
TRB
Like I've said all along. It'll happen when there's no alternative. We're done way from that because May is still in head-up-arse la-la-la, "My deal is the only possible way forward" mode. Once it's clear that her deal is NOT going to pass and No Deal is taken off the table by Parliament, and it's clear that the Tory party and DUP won't allow a GE, what possiible outcome is there but Ref2?
I did think that having failed to get a GE that last week Corbyn might have thrown his weight behind a referendum. For me, unless the Labour leadership openly back a referendum, it isn't going to happen.
It will be interesting to see if any of the amendments to the meaningful vote take two get passed.
-
TRB
If you've accept that No Deal is a non-starter, and there is no way that May can tweak her deal to turn round a 230 vote deficit in the House, then think about where we are.
We are 61 days from Brexit Day. 32 working days in the Commons.
There is no possibile way that any alternative deal is going to be negotiated with the EU, ratified by 27 EU Govts, voted on and passed in Parliament and then the dozen or so enabling Bills put through Parliament to allow us an orderly exist on 29 March.
So we now have no option but to ask the EU for an extension of the A50 deadline (of course we won't do that immediately because the Tory party is still playing its games of chicken about who is going to get the blame for killing off No Deal, but we'll be asking for that extension before the end of next month).
But, here's where it gets interesting. The EU have said that they are open to extending the deadline, but (quite rightly) they have said they are not giving us an extension that just allows the f**king about of the past 2 years to carry on. They want a clear and unambiguous plan on what we plan to do to bring the process quickly and unambiguously to a close.
There's only one possible answer to that. We agree to Ref2.
-
Looks like some of the areas of the UK, including ours, are going to get exactly what they voted for....
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-wales-cornwall-regional-funding-eu/
This funding loss will be most keenly felt in two regions: Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, and West Wales and the Welsh Valleys.
These are classed as ‘less developed regions’, and currently receive most of the UK’s regional funding.
Three additional areas would have been able to join them in the post-2020 period: South Yorkshire, Tees Valley & Durham, and Lincolnshire.
All five of these regions stood to receive EU support in excess of €500 or £440 per capita per year for the seven-year period.
-
I am sick of reading the posts of defeatist quislinngs on this thread. Some of you were rubbishing the Uk Fishing Industry with great gusto. A distrusting shower is what you are! The French Government has just realised the crisis i it is about to face with a no deal hard Brexit. total exclusion from Uk waters which account for nearly half of the Eu fishing grounds. Yes we do only have 12,500 fishermen but Eu fleets plunder 8 x the UK catch from our waters, 65,000 fishermen in France alone not to mention Belgium Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, now we have all seen how the French can kick off so will the Spanish and The Dutch and Belgians. It’s time to rattle a few sabres. I think Somebody quoted our fishing Industry was only worth £3.5 billion a year well when we kick some ass it will be worth £30billion a year. But in reality it is worth hundreds of billions more because we can hold The Macron Government to ransom,quickly followed by Spain ,Netherlands and Belgium the Stupid self serving euro crats from tiny states such as Luxembourg and Poland will be getting their P 45’s. within a week if we let them know what they will be in for.
-
Dam Busters Theme anyone...?
-
Christ now I remember why I stopped visiting Off Topic - see you still have your resident lunatic from Sprotborough with you then. Feck me he sounds like a Scottish Tory.
Quislings indeed - I suppose we are all the Norway option !
-
I take it Sprotyrover isn't a supporter of the Britain Surrendering Together party!
-
Looks like some of the areas of the UK, including ours, are going to get exactly what they voted for....
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-wales-cornwall-regional-funding-eu/
This funding loss will be most keenly felt in two regions: Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, and West Wales and the Welsh Valleys.
These are classed as ‘less developed regions’, and currently receive most of the UK’s regional funding.
Three additional areas would have been able to join them in the post-2020 period: South Yorkshire, Tees Valley & Durham, and Lincolnshire.
All five of these regions stood to receive EU support in excess of €500 or £440 per capita per year for the seven-year period.
Ni mind eh? That's £3000 per person in South Yorkshire, paid for by EU tax payers that we won't be getting. On top of the £70bn that a report today says we'd already lost by mid-2018 due to depressed economic performance since the 2016 vote.
But at least we took back control eh? And gave BB plenty of opportunities to show how witty he is. So it's not all bad.
-
Seeing as how both major political parties stated in their manifestos that they would respect the referendum result.
If you voted in the general election for any of those parties, Did you know what you were voting for? and would you like another vote?
-
Billy stop the spin, we are net contributors to the EU, therefore you could argue we put some money in and they give us a little bit back to spend of our own British tax payers money.
It is like asking for a fiver off a mate, buying him a pint for three quid, and keeping the change, and him thinking your doing him a favour.
-
Seeing as how both major political parties stated in their manifestos that they would respect the referendum result.
If you voted in the general election for any of those parties, Did you know what you were voting for? and would you like another vote?
Oddly enough, you get a chance to vote out a party that doesn't deliver on its manifesto every five years... so should there be a vote to stop a process where we won't get what we were promised we'd be able to have by the people campaigning for it? or does that logic only work when it fits your argument.
-
Red, the question was, did you know what you were voting for in the last election? And if not would you want to re run that election.
-
So yes it does only apply when you feel like it, thanks for answering.
-
Red, I expected better.
-
Selby
Aye. And the question is, if the UK stops paying into the EU, how much of that benefit will be spent in South Yorkshire?
The EU was planning to invest £3bn in SY over the next 7 years.
Because, under the Tories, SY has slipped back to being where it was under the previous Tory administration 20 years ago - one of the poorest regions in the EU.
You reckon this Tory Govt would invest what it saves on EU budget contributions in SY? Really? Honestly?
Turkeys and chuffing Xmas comes to mind.
-
Oh aye. And that's before you take into account that our shocking economic performance in the first 2 years since the Brexit-supporting vote has already cost us nearly NINE YEARS worth of our annual net EU budget contribution. So anything we save on the EU budget is massively outweighed by what we are already losing through depressed economic performance.
Still. Took back control, eh?
-
I am sick of reading the posts of defeatist quislinngs on this thread. Some of you were rubbishing the Uk Fishing Industry with great gusto. A distrusting shower is what you are! The French Government has just realised the crisis i it is about to face with a no deal hard Brexit. total exclusion from Uk waters which account for nearly half of the Eu fishing grounds. Yes we do only have 12,500 fishermen but Eu fleets plunder 8 x the UK catch from our waters, 65,000 fishermen in France alone not to mention Belgium Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, now we have all seen how the French can kick off so will the Spanish and The Dutch and Belgians. It’s time to rattle a few sabres. I think Somebody quoted our fishing Industry was only worth £3.5 billion a year well when we kick some ass it will be worth £30billion a year. But in reality it is worth hundreds of billions more because we can hold The Macron Government to ransom,quickly followed by Spain ,Netherlands and Belgium the Stupid self serving euro crats from tiny states such as Luxembourg and Poland will be getting their P 45’s. within a week if we let them know what they will be in for.
That's what happens when the UK sells their fishing quotas to foreigners instead of UK fishermen. 'Plundered'? They're only taking what they've paid for - but that doesn't sound as melodramatic or jingoistic, does it?
-
Billy where I think any money is spent by anybody is neither here or there, I am pointing out it is a myth the EU invest in projects in this country with anything other than money that we have already contributed to the EU. Do we or do we not pay more into the Eu than we get back?
Those blue plaques are the most expensive things we have ever bought.
You are peddling spin.
As for the last election, I think by the lack of answers to the Question by the serial posters, I can take it you didn't know what you were voting for.
-
It isn't just money we get back from the EU. It also buys us the membership of the Customs Union and Single Market too, which earns this country a lot more than the purely monetary deficit.
-
Selby
Look at it another way.
The net EU budget contribution comes to about £150 person per year in the UK.
Had we stayed in the EU, the funding coming to South Yorkshire would have been £440 per person per year for the next 7 years.
Still, we took back control, eh?
It's truly heartbreaking that you're so insistent on not getting this.
Let me spell it out really simply.
Yes, the UK is a net contributor to the EU budget.
But we in SY are not.
We are among the poorest people in the EU.
One of the absolute priorities of the EU is to see investment going into poorer areas to bring them up to something more dignified.
Areas that get f**ked on by the market economy, and ignored by their own Governments.
That means taking net money from richer areas (like London and Barcelona and Paris and Bavaria and Milan) and giving it to poorer areas (like Doncaster).
It's precisely the opposite of what our Westminster Govt has done for 9 years, where they have sucked money out of our economy and given tax cuts to top rate tax payers. A Govt which, in it's very first month in power slashed the council budgets across the North and gave increases to places like Dorset.
It is breathtakingly self-harming for people in SY to have voted to turn this down. The fact that you've been played into doing so by people who are using you as a pawn in their power games in the Tory party, and you refuse to see it, just adds pathos to the tragedy.
-
Businessman: "Setting up a factory will cost me £250K a year. It will earn me £5mill a year. But I'm not going to set up a factory because I will be £250K out of pocket."
Good business?
-
''Britons don’t grasp the EU’s essential motivation – a quest for the quiet life''
Maybe a little oversimplified but there is sound reasoning in the main thrust.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?action=post;topic=268078.1290;last_msg=832960
-
It isn't just money we get back from the EU. It also buys us the membership of the Customs Union and Single Market too, which earns this country a lot more than the purely monetary deficit.
And if we don't pay to remain part of those, there's not an economist in the world who thinks we're not going to see a huge additional hit to our economy.
Still, we took back control, eh?
-
By the way. See the map below.
And before anyone starts, we're not poor in SY because we're in the EU. We're poor in SY because for most of the past 40 years, the UK has been ruled by Govts who didn't give a monkey's chuff about SY.
We DID get out of the group of poorest regions in the EU in the late 00s. In part because we had money pumped into our economy and infrastructure by the EU, after decades of neglect by Westminster.
I am utterly bewildered that anyone in SY can seriously look at these figures and not realise what f**king idiots they are being supporting Brexit.
(https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/2/25/Gross_domestic_product_%28GDP%29_per_inhabitant%2C_by_NUTS_2_regions%2C_2016_%28based_on_data_in_purchasing_power_standards_%28PPS%29_in_relation_to_the_EU-28_average%2C_EU-28_%3D_100%29-RYB18.png)
-
Waddoo we want
'austerity'
when do we want it, now!
-
Billy stop the spin, we are net contributors to the EU, therefore you could argue we put some money in and they give us a little bit back to spend of our own British tax payers money.
It is like asking for a fiver off a mate, buying him a pint for three quid, and keeping the change, and him thinking your doing him a favour.
No. It's like asking a mate for a fiver, buying him a pint for three quid, and then giving him a tenner back because of all the deals you've been able to do based on his original loan.
If only people understood the financial advantages we get from our payments to the EU as part of our membership! Way more than the 'refund' we get. Net contributors, yes, net advantage gainers.... oh yes. Seems you don't understand why our membership is so financially beneficial Selby?
-
Seeing as how both major political parties stated in their manifestos that they would respect the referendum result.
If you voted in the general election for any of those parties, Did you know what you were voting for? and would you like another vote?
If the government doesn’t deliver on their pre GE manifesto, or brings about unexpected and unwanted outcomes, they can be voted out next time..
Brexit isn’t delivering is it.? Therefore it seems entirely reasonable to vote again.!
-
Nah that's all down to the Remoaners not getting behind it and using our British spirit. :silly:
-
Even if it is because Labour vote against it? IDM, which would be against the majority of their voters wishes, and was in their manifesto.
Only liberal party voters can say they voted for their party to oppose exiting EU membership, Any voter who voted for the two major parties, and wanted to remain in the EU could not have read their manifestos, and really did not know what they were voting for, probably thick like they like to portray anybody who voted out in the referendum
-
The GE was about much more than brexit though..
I struggle to vote in the GE because I have very little time for either political party, they are all as bad as each other, but the point remains that GE results which turn out bad for the country can be overturned at the next vote.
-
Selby.
I'm a Labour party member. I voted Labour last time round, whilst vehemently disagreeing with the policy of Brexit and doing my utmost to change it.
Like IDM says, nobody agrees with every word written in any party's manifesto. You support a party in a GE on the overall balance of their policies and what the alternatives are.
You're setting up a straw man to argue with.
-
Billy, this country has had three votes on coming out of the EU.
The referendum result was to come out.
In the General Election both major parties stated in their manifesto that they would uphold the referendum result. Only the Liberals,SNP, and Greens stating in their manifestos that they opposed it.
Then at the general election MP's were voted in to carry out the will of the people which they had published in their manifestos, the result of which the two major parties were voted in to carry out our exit with the voters seconding our exit vote by voting for those two parties.
Then those same MP's voted in the house of commons to put our Exit INTO THE LAW OF THE LAND and the leave date of March 29th 2019 so third-ed the leave vote.
Now I could accept the argument if the Liberals had got 16 million more votes, or there had been 16 million abstentions, but there was no outcry apart from Jimmy Cranky over the border, or are you telling me that the voters for both major parties didn't know what they were voting for, or were like Lemmings voting for a party whose manifestos should be hung on a nail on the bog door?
Just how many votes do you want? Or as a paid up party member are you saying that your party manifesto is a pack of lies to get votes? If it is the latter it is time to pack in the party system in this country.
-
Politics eh Selby?
Firstly, minor point of fact, Parliament voted for A50 before the 2017 GE.
Secondly, and very importantly, back in 2017 (and even moreso in 2016) there was no clarity among the electorate about what the effects of Brexit were. So parties had little option but to play politics. It would have been electoral suicide for the Labour party to campaign against Brexit in 2017.
Do I like that? No, not at all. Do I understand it? Yes. It is due to the political landscape at the time, which was still eavily influenced by the bullshit that had been promised by the Leave side. There was a feeling in the country in early 2017 that Brexit was something we had to get on with and sort out, and if either major party had gone against that, it would have been curtains for them. At that time.
Why do you think may called the A50 vote just before she called a GE? For political reasons. She wanted Labour, ideally for her, to vote against it. But by voting for it, she got them in the second best position for her, in boxing them in in the way that you point out.
But that's how politics goes. Parties have to box clever and they change their approaches when circumstances dictate.
Back in 2017, most of the elctorate thought Brexit was going to be a straightforward thing to sort out. We were still being told that we were going to be wealthier after it, and that the negotiations would be dead easy.
We have a far clearer idea now of what Brexit means. And polls are showing a consistent move towards more and more voters thinking we made the wrong decision in 2016.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/
A political party that didn't take that change of circumstances into account would be stupid.
And yes, I would much prefer for parties to have high minded principles and not play these games. But that would require an electorate that considered nuanced positions carefully and didn't make knee reactions. We're a long way from having that. And so we get the political parties we deserve.
-
Anyway, I see there's no response from you about the funding that South Yorkshire is going to lose when we leave the EU, and how that is going to be made up by the British Govt.
-
I take it Sprotyrover isn't a supporter of the Britain Surrendering Together party!
Hilarious , I've missed your finely - tuned wit. 😂😂
-
Why thanks Hoola! I'll have you in the British Bulldogs party one day!
-
Billy stop the spin, we are net contributors to the EU, therefore you could argue we put some money in and they give us a little bit back to spend of our own British tax payers money.
It is like asking for a fiver off a mate, buying him a pint for three quid, and keeping the change, and him thinking your doing him a favour.
No. It's like asking a mate for a fiver, buying him a pint for three quid, and then giving him a tenner back because of all the deals you've been able to do based on his original loan.
If only people understood the financial advantages we get from our payments to the EU as part of our membership! Way more than the 'refund' we get. Net contributors, yes, net advantage gainers.... oh yes. Seems you don't understand why our membership is so financially beneficial Selby?
One big benefit is for our farmers. They receive £3bn a year in EU subsidies. We leave on no deal and theres two scenarios, we get the increased tariffs from WTO which make us poorer or we make deals to not add tariffs, which then hits our farmers and will put them out of business.
-
Well played Billy, now I know you are good at politics , when in doubt come out with "well yes but"
-
So you have no answer then.
-
We don't live in an ideal world Selby.
I very much dislike the way that Corbyn has played Brexit-supporting from the start. But that's the world we are in. You make the best of it.
Now. About that EU funding...
-
When historians look back on this period, they'll be astonished how many groups of people were in on this Project Fear thing, scheming to con the Great British Public out of their Glorious Brexit-supporting.
MPs. Of course.
Journalists. Natch.
Governor of the Bank of England.
Heads of car manufacturers.
Pretty much anyone who's ever picked up Economics for Dummies.
The head of Airbus.
Now the heads of supermarkets.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748
Bunch of devious, lying bas**rds eh? The lot of em.
And they are obviously overplaying their devious hands because...
A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman said: The UK has a high level of food security built upon a diverse range of sources, including strong domestic production and imports from other countries.
‘This will continue to be the case whether we leave the EU with or without a deal.
‘The Government has well-established ways of working with the food industry to prevent disruption – and we are using these to support preparations for leaving the EU.’
See. It's alright really because May's Govt has got it all under control.
-
It is not EU funding, it is the pittance they give us back out of our own contributions. How can they be funding us when we contribute more than they give us back.
The British tax payer is funding their projects as well as our own.
-
So you just ignore the posts I've made answering that point and repeat the same point?
-
It is not EU funding, it is the pittance they give us back out of our own contributions. How can they be funding us when we contribute more than they give us back.
The British tax payer is funding their projects as well as our own.
As BST and many experts in politics but especially in commerce and trade have stated membership of the EU is worth far more than ones membership fee. Equate it to being a member of amazon prime, being a regular buyer the membership fee has soon been ameliorated by the savings in freight. But you don't appear to want to acknowledge any of that in your arguments Selby by keep banging on about this was voted for that was voted for. If brexit goes ahead our trading position will be seriously disadvantaged which will probably mean Austerity Plus and apart from not getting a fair shake from our own government we will not get the regional grants from the EU, which would more than likely mean that DR business owners will not be trading so well, less money to invest, not so much money to spend on season tickets, fixing potholes etc and conference football on the horizon.
-
The EU didn't stop us being in the Conference before.
-
And the other major benefit of being part of the EU? Peace.
There has been no wars fought between European countries in over 60 years! (That's got to be some kind of record?)
-
The EU didn't stop us being in the Conference before.
That was because we had an amoral Kitson in charge who ran us into the ground to further his own aims.
Nice little parable actually...
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47034701
Jesus.
f**king.
Wept.
59 days from Brexit.
2.5 years since the vote.
And the best we can come up with to deal with the issue that was obvious to everyone who spent five minutes thinking about it, was going to be the hard one is "al-f**king-ternative arrangements"?
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47034701
Jesus.
f**king.
Wept.
59 days from Brexit.
2.5 years since the vote.
And the best we can come up with to deal with the issue that was obvious to everyone who spent five minutes thinking about it, was going to be the hard one is "al-f**king-ternative arrangements"?
Hold on there, not since the early days of Edward De Bono have we had a breakthrough of such massive proportions and could be used to solve the Mid-East crisis, Syria, Russia, China, Iraq, Venezuela, this is a gift to the world from the best conservative brains and can also be modified to fix climate change, starvation, disease, cancer: "al-f**king-ternative arrangements"? ...........fmd.
-
Dr Liam Fox - sly weasel - although that covers most of them
Just been on BBC for the millionth time - peddling his own views and ignoring the questions asked - though again that covers most of them
Once again saying a Second Referendum would be an affront to democracy and that Voters would not be happy if they voted again in any future Referendum and then just had to sit back waiting for those that dislike the outcome to alter it
Oh wait (and why doesnt ANYBODY ask him and others) thats exactly what happened in 1976. The voters said remain (I said Leave) and then with no pressure whatsoever from the electorate the MPs and others gradually worked away until they themselves engineered another Referndum
Whats the difference Fox ? Please answer the Question
-
When historians look back on this period, they'll be astonished how many groups of people were in on this Project Fear thing, scheming to con the Great British Public out of their Glorious Brexit-supporting.
MPs. Of course.
Journalists. Natch.
Governor of the Bank of England.
Heads of car manufacturers.
Pretty much anyone who's ever picked up Economics for Dummies.
The head of Airbus.
Now the heads of supermarkets.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748
Bunch of devious, lying bas**rds eh? The lot of em.
And they are obviously overplaying their devious hands because...
A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman said: The UK has a high level of food security built upon a diverse range of sources, including strong domestic production and imports from other countries.
‘This will continue to be the case whether we leave the EU with or without a deal.
‘The Government has well-established ways of working with the food industry to prevent disruption – and we are using these to support preparations for leaving the EU.’
See. It's alright really because May's Govt has got it all under control.
It's also amazing how companies who are all about making profits for their shareholders are willing to throw their money away recruiting in the EU and paying redundancies in the UK just to further Project Fear!!
-
It is not EU funding, it is the pittance they give us back out of our own contributions. How can they be funding us when we contribute more than they give us back.
The British tax payer is funding their projects as well as our own.
Well, once the British government start paying for stuff instead of the EU, that'll be exactly the same, they'll only be spending our own money won't they? Same as local government too. They both cost us more than we get back.
But we don't get membership of the Customs Union and Single Market - the biggest boost to businesses in the country we've currently got - from Central and local government. Perhaps we're getting rid of the wrong strata of governance..?
-
There's 32 days left in the commons before the Brexit deadline. If Article 50 isn't extended or withdrawn by then, we're f*cked, because these last minute amendments and suggestions of going back to Brussels will be fruitless.
-
New insight into the mind of a brexiteer:
"It would do the country good to go without food"
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1090010668164620289
:headbang: :suicide:
-
Amazing int it?
3 years ago it was "We'll thrive outside Europe"
A year ago it was "There'll be some rocky times as we settle down but then it'll be ok."
Now it's "It'll do us good to do without food."
I heard a Tory MP say a week or two back that we coped with the Blitz and we coped with the Black Death so we'll cope with Brexit.
What in the name of God has happened to this country? We used to be a watchword for self-interested pragmatism. Now we've gone f**king insane. And for what? What are we going to gain to justify the madness we're in the edge of jumping into?
-
Genius.
https://mobile.twitter.com/davidschneider/status/1090169518075322373
-
Not genius.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1090266265304748033
What an utter f**king shambles we look to Europe.
The Govt spends 2 years negotiating a deal without ever bothering to check whether there was support for the deal in Parliament.
The 27 EU Govts all agree it.
May takes it to Parliament, saying this is the only deal available and the EU won't re-negotiate.
Parliament rejects it by a historic margin.
The EU firmly, loudly and consistently says it won't re-open the negotiations.
May spends today in Parliament supporting a motion to give her a mandate to go and re-open negotiations with the EU.
It is utterly f**king bonkers. All to do with the games being played about who rules the f**king Tory party. And the entire country is being made to look an incompetent laughing stock because of it.
-
The EU have already put out a statement saying they will reject the Brady amendment. And yet our MPs are still voting on it and May is still backing it publicly. It's being debated as we speak. It's like having a debate over what the Rovers score was on Saturday. It's been and gone already! It's decided! I do feel like we're in the Twilight Zone here.
-
... too true MM
Waste of time again - voting to send "her" back to open the Agreement again and abolish the Back stop when the EU have said time and again - we will not renegotiate
I hope the electorate remember this total s***storm when this is all over one way or the other
UNACEPPTABLE
-
Just another big boot of the can by the looks
Theresa May is like the 2 year old kicking off in the shop because his parents won’t buy him some sweets
-
She's really made the worst out of a shit job.
We're clearly heading to no deal thanks to her and her government.
-
The EU have already put out a statement saying they will reject the Brady amendment. And yet our MPs are still voting on it and May is still backing it publicly. It's being debated as we speak. It's like having a debate over what the Rovers score was on Saturday. It's been and gone already! It's decided! I do feel like we're in the Twilight Zone here.
And incredibly, the amendment has been passed. Batshit crazy, this.
-
The EU have already put out a statement saying they will reject the Brady amendment. And yet our MPs are still voting on it and May is still backing it publicly. It's being debated as we speak. It's like having a debate over what the Rovers score was on Saturday. It's been and gone already! It's decided! I do feel like we're in the Twilight Zone here.
And incredibly, the amendment has been passed. Batshit crazy, this.
And some people say politics is a waste of time.
-
But as I keep saying, this is about one thing only. The Tories jockeying for position for who to blame when we end up with Ref2.
When this is kicked back, the ERG can blame May for being hopeless and the EU for being intransigent. Makes you weep.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punxsutawney_Phil
-
Kick the can down the road as a political strategy, we have nothing else to offer!
Pretend to enter"negotiations", then blame the EU for not accepting changes to the agreement put in place by her own red lines when she agreed the terms.
May is using delay as a tactic to make the meaningful vote (when it comes) a straight choice between her wretched deal and a toxic no deal.
She knows the ERG will back no deal, and that the HoC numbers opposed to that makes her option preferable, despite being shite.
Treeza is also thinking that the 14 Labour MP's who defied the party whip will continue to offset her own refuseniks, giving her the numbers to push it over the line.
She can play on the insecurities of Labour members from Leave supporting areas for game management.
The 14 need to ask themselves if their constituents will be in a better place as a result of a May deal going forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/labour-mps-rebel-vote-down-yvette-cooper-no-deal-amendment
Struggling to see it myself!
Lets see if anyone finds some backbone when she returns with a heroic failure in 2 weeks time!
-
Does anyone in the real world actually understand what the f**k is going on with brexit, apart from the usual dick waving politicking.??
-
Kick the can down the road as a political strategy, we have nothing else to offer!
Pretend to enter"negotiations", then blame the EU for not accepting changes to the agreement put in place by her own red lines when she agreed the terms.
May is using delay as a tactic to make the meaningful vote (when it comes) a straight choice between her wretched deal and a toxic no deal.
She knows the ERG will back no deal, and that the HoC numbers opposed to that makes her option preferable, despite being shite.
Treeza is also thinking that the 14 Labour MP's who defied the party whip will continue to offset her own refuseniks, giving her the numbers to push it over the line.
She can play on the insecurities of Labour members from Leave supporting areas for game management.
The 14 need to ask themselves if their constituents will be in a better place as a result of a May deal going forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/labour-mps-rebel-vote-down-yvette-cooper-no-deal-amendment
Struggling to see it myself!
Lets see if anyone finds some backbone when she returns with a heroic failure in 2 weeks time!
A good theory, let down by the fact she can't present her deal to the House again in it's present form because it's already been voted down.
-
Kick the can down the road as a political strategy, we have nothing else to offer!
Pretend to enter"negotiations", then blame the EU for not accepting changes to the agreement put in place by her own red lines when she agreed the terms.
May is using delay as a tactic to make the meaningful vote (when it comes) a straight choice between her wretched deal and a toxic no deal.
She knows the ERG will back no deal, and that the HoC numbers opposed to that makes her option preferable, despite being shite.
Treeza is also thinking that the 14 Labour MP's who defied the party whip will continue to offset her own refuseniks, giving her the numbers to push it over the line.
She can play on the insecurities of Labour members from Leave supporting areas for game management.
The 14 need to ask themselves if their constituents will be in a better place as a result of a May deal going forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/labour-mps-rebel-vote-down-yvette-cooper-no-deal-amendment
Struggling to see it myself!
Lets see if anyone finds some backbone when she returns with a heroic failure in 2 weeks time!
A good theory, let down by the fact she can't present her deal to the House again in it's present form because it's already been voted down.
I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but surely if she goes to Brussels and comes back with no changes to the Withdrawal Agreement she can re-present it as the EU's final offer? Also, might some changes to the Political Declaration, where there might be some wriggle room, constitute a change to the package MPs voted on last time?
The only other things to break the log-jam are a General Election or another Referendum. Corbyn's No-Confidence motion proved there wasn't support for a GE. At the moment, there aren't anything like enough MPs in favour of Ref2.
-
Glyn,
As I posted further up the thread, the May deal is now "May as amended", so will come to the HoC as such in 2 weeks.
Further amendments will be tabled once she returns. It is then that we will see movement in the votes as variations are re-submitted.
As TRB says, GE and Ref2 are not in the game until the numbers realign around the revised amendments. They MAY come back into play, but it is not a given.
-
TRB
Changes to the Political Declaration are meaningless. The ERG want a legally binding set of wording in the WA which effectively neuters the Backstop.
The EU said before the vote last night (and they've been saying for weeks now) that won't happen. Because a Backstop that we can walk away from is, by definition, not a Backstop.
This is all about positioning for the forthcoming Blame Game when we're faced with the real decision in February - Accept May's original deal, crash out with No Deal or go for Ref2.
Of those three alternatives, the first is unrealistic given the opposition to it two weeks ago and the second would be lunacy. So the third will happen. But only when there's no alternative. And when that happens, the politicians all want to blame someone else for it.
-
This is bang on the money.
https://m.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2266593683665364/
I don't agree with the final paragraph, because I still think there are enough grown ups in Parliament to prevent us going into the self-inflicted madness of No Deal. But the fact that the Tory party is taking us to the cliff edge of that scenario is reckless in the extreme. If we DO stumble into No Deal, it will be the biggest foreign policy disaster since Chamberlain at Munich. With similar economic consequences.
-
Similar economic consequences to ww2? :lol: :lol:
Thanks for the laugh.
-
8-10% drop in GDP over a decade?
Keep up.
I know facts aren't your strong point, but you'd do well to look at the numbers.
In the early part of the War, our GDP exploded as we went balls out to produce guns and bombs and planes and tanks and boats. We financed that through huge Govt debt. After the early stage, as the USA and USSR took up the majority of the fighting, we cut back sharply, with GDP dropping by about 8% between 1943 and 1946.
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1940_1950UKb_17c1li011mcn__UK_Gross_Domestic_Product_GDP_History
You want us to take a deliberate decision to have a similar loss of growth, albeit over a longer timescale.
-
Glyn,
As I posted further up the thread, the May deal is now "May as amended", so will come to the HoC as such in 2 weeks.
Further amendments will be tabled once she returns. It is then that we will see movement in the votes as variations are re-submitted.
As TRB says, GE and Ref2 are not in the game until the numbers realign around the revised amendments. They MAY come back into play, but it is not a given.
May's deal hasn't been changed at all yet. And certainly not then agreed to by the EU. If all May gets out of the EU are 'legal reassurances' or something similar, the deal is still exactly the same. It cannot be re-presented to the House with out substantial changes (ie not just a few rewordings that don't change anything.) otherwise the Speaker will not allow it to be voted on as it would be in essence the same Deal.
PS You didn't say 'May as amended' in your post that I quoted. But it doesn't matter as it hasn't been amended/altered yet.
-
Kick the can down the road as a political strategy, we have nothing else to offer!
Pretend to enter"negotiations", then blame the EU for not accepting changes to the agreement put in place by her own red lines when she agreed the terms.
May is using delay as a tactic to make the meaningful vote (when it comes) a straight choice between her wretched deal and a toxic no deal.
She knows the ERG will back no deal, and that the HoC numbers opposed to that makes her option preferable, despite being shite.
Treeza is also thinking that the 14 Labour MP's who defied the party whip will continue to offset her own refuseniks, giving her the numbers to push it over the line.
She can play on the insecurities of Labour members from Leave supporting areas for game management.
The 14 need to ask themselves if their constituents will be in a better place as a result of a May deal going forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/labour-mps-rebel-vote-down-yvette-cooper-no-deal-amendment
Struggling to see it myself!
Lets see if anyone finds some backbone when she returns with a heroic failure in 2 weeks time!
A good theory, let down by the fact she can't present her deal to the House again in it's present form because it's already been voted down.
I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but surely if she goes to Brussels and comes back with no changes to the Withdrawal Agreement she can re-present it as the EU's final offer? Also, might some changes to the Political Declaration, where there might be some wriggle room, constitute a change to the package MPs voted on last time?
The only other things to break the log-jam are a General Election or another Referendum. Corbyn's No-Confidence motion proved there wasn't support for a GE. At the moment, there aren't anything like enough MPs in favour of Ref2.
No she can't because it's already been voted on and rejected.
I mean...what? Have a second vote because you didn't like the first one..? Isn't that supposed to be undemocratic? :silly:
-
There's actually a strong case that a No Deal Brexit will be worse that WWII for our economy over a long period.
During the War, we realised that Govt direction of the economy could significantly boost the economy. As a result, once we'd got over the shock, we boomed.
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1920_1970UKp_17c1li011mcn__UK_Gross_Domestic_Product_GDP_History
That's not going to be the result of a No Deal Brexit. Every prediction is that No Deal will put us into a much slower growth trajectory for at least 15-20 years.
And that's the Britain that you want.
-
This is all about positioning for the forthcoming Blame Game when we're faced with the real decision in February - Accept May's original deal, crash out with No Deal or go for Ref2.
Of those three alternatives, the first is unrealistic given the opposition to it two weeks ago and the second would be lunacy. So the third will happen.
I know you have steadfastly maintained the view that No Deal will not happen BST, and that Ref2 will, but I have to say that with each passing day and week the horrendous prospect of crashing out with No Deal becomes more and more of a possibility.
By the same token, my gut feel is that Ref2 becomes less and less likely as the clock ticks down.
I hope I'm wrong, but with the bunch of idiots in the HOC I fear we are sleep-walking into a disaster.
-
Does anyone in the real world actually understand what the f**k is going on with brexit, apart from the usual dick waving politicking.??
I feel the same way as you on this IDM.
Even people who have strong opinions about this are having to change some of their views.
There are also people who, on the face of it, tell us one thing as an absolute certainty to happen.
But.... along comes another person who claims to know what is going to happen......and it is different to what the other people have said.
-
It just shows how unclear and indicisive things are Pancho that after last night's votes I totally disagree with you. OK 14 Labour rebels voted against Cooper to extend Article 50 - but look who they were, Ian Austin, John Mann, Caroline Flint, there is no way on earth in a crunch vote to stop No Deal that they wouldn't support it. OK, Skinner, Hopkins, Snell might but it certainly wouldn't be 14 Labour MP's and a few more Tories would also change sides (as they said before last night).
Nothing is certain but the Spelman amendment passing was a very good indicator.
-
If I’m seeing it right it’s ironic. The need to avoid the hard border in Ireland is driving the backstop, the thing stopping a deal and driving us to a no deal scenario and hard border is the backstop...........
-
Throwback to when we were told this wouldn't be an issue...
-
Ldr
Bang on.
But this was predictable (and predicted) 2 years ago.
The EU has consistently said that the Irish border is a red line. They will NOT sacrifice the economy of a member to satisfy us.
Equally, the insistence on the UK having the right to leave the CU, and consequently, to decide what happens to the Irish border is a red line for the right wing of the Tory party, which is holding May and the rest of the UK to ransom.
This should have been the number one issue that was discussed in the campaign in 2016. But it was barely mentioned. When it WAS mentioned, the Leave side screamed that it was Project Fear.
Just one among many issues on which the electorate was misinformed and mislead in 2016.
Incredibly, after all this time, after 2 years of negotiations and despite all the evidence, the policy of the Govt today is that there is a fairy dust technological solution to the Irish border. No idea what that solution is. Just that there IS one. That's what May is going to Brussels to tell them. Can you imagine how f**king stupid, obstinate and divorced from reality we look to the rest of the EU?
Now we know how impossible a situation it is, it's a rock solid argument for re-visiting the 2016 decision.
-
There IS the other issue that Peston has pointed out too.
The detail of the backstop was painstakingly negotiated by May with the EU. The EU made some significant concessions. May told them she had the authority to negotiate that deal.
But she didn't. It was thrown out by Parliament, our sovereign body. So why on earth should they negotiate in good faith with her now? In 2 weeks.
What evidence do they have that anything they might agree with here now will get through Parliament.
An utter, unmitigated shambles.
-
Why didn’t we have a parliament agreed proposed deal to take to the EU in the first place? Or better still, at the referendum.
-
TRB
Changes to the Political Declaration are meaningless. The ERG want a legally binding set of wording in the WA which effectively neuters the Backstop.
The EU said before the vote last night (and they've been saying for weeks now) that won't happen. Because a Backstop that we can walk away from is, by definition, not a Backstop.
This is all about positioning for the forthcoming Blame Game when we're faced with the real decision in February - Accept May's original deal, crash out with No Deal or go for Ref2.
Of those three alternatives, the first is unrealistic given the opposition to it two weeks ago and the second would be lunacy. So the third will happen. But only when there's no alternative. And when that happens, the politicians all want to blame someone else for it.
BST
Ref2 has its own issues. For a start there seem to be fewer MPs who support it than support May's Deal (Mark 1). However, I do think support for it could increase when other alternatives are exhausted. BUT - there is a much bigger problem. Can you imagine the current HoC agreeing what would go on the ballot paper? You'd have some who wanted May vs. Remain, some for May vs. No Deal, some for Remain vs. No Deal and some for a range of options with an alternative vote.
The answer then might be change the HoC via a General Election. I might be wrong, but I think a GE now would produce broadly similar numbers to what we have now.
I agree with Wilts, there are probably enough MPs to vote against No Deal, when push comes to shove. But there is nowhere near a consensus on anything close to an actual Deal.
-
The interesting thing is Corbyn also saying he has issues with the backdrop. So everyone is pretty much agreed on that bar the eu. In reality the backdrop can't and won't happen. It will be something else.
-
The interesting thing is Corbyn also saying he has issues with the backdrop. So everyone is pretty much agreed on that bar the eu. In reality the backdrop can't and won't happen. It will be something else.
But at least Corbyn has some sort of solution in a version of the CU/SM as his position. Go that way and you won't need a backstop as there won't be a border.
The only problem is, though, we've no idea what version of CU/SM he's got in mind.
-
The interesting thing is Corbyn also saying he has issues with the backdrop. So everyone is pretty much agreed on that bar the eu. In reality the backdrop can't and won't happen. It will be something else.
But at least Corbyn has some sort of solution in a version of the CU/SM as his position. Go that way and you won't need a backstop as there won't be a border.
The only problem is, though, we've no idea what version of CU/SM he's got in mind.
I voted leave and I could get behind that. Was about opting out if a federal state for me
-
The interesting thing is Corbyn also saying he has issues with the backdrop. So everyone is pretty much agreed on that bar the eu. In reality the backdrop can't and won't happen. It will be something else.
But at least Corbyn has some sort of solution in a version of the CU/SM as his position. Go that way and you won't need a backstop as there won't be a border.
The only problem is, though, we've no idea what version of CU/SM he's got in mind.
I voted leave and I could get behind that. Was about opting out if a federal state for me
Potentially yes. Free trade is not and should not be a huge issue but it depends on what strings are attached.
-
Corbyn & Starmer have said they want a CU/SM deal and the EU have said they want us to stay in the CU/SM so clearly if May is prepared to go down that road there is a negotiation to be had. Despite of course the HoC having already voted against both.
The big dilemma for her still remains that the hard right ERG in her party (and probably also the DUP) dont regard this as Brexit & would see it as a betrayal & sellout to Labour. For which the consequences would be....
So that's May's choice for you. Keep party unity by appeasing the ERG & chasing a deal that doesn't exist or find some cross-party CU/SM consensus deal with the EU - and split the Tories. As it has been since she lost her majority/Corbyn took her majority away in the GE.
-
Why didn’t we have a parliament agreed proposed deal to take to the EU in the first place? Or better still, at the referendum.
Sadly, we weren't prepared back then. But don't worry, we're fully prepared now - especially for a No Deal Hard Brexit; and we've still got a couple of months in hand too....
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/brexit-two-months-to-go-final-web.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3X6csR1rIgySIl3i-H9gup_avDIBgQj4x6NLJilWXpJZxO3GiFAjnll7Y
-
Why didn’t we have a parliament agreed proposed deal to take to the EU in the first place? Or better still, at the referendum.
Probably because no one had an idea of what was to be sorted out.
-
According to the BBC yesterday, Teresa May is really going to sort out the EU this time....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MvfW5f4z7M
-
May is now after bribing weak minded Labour rebels:
https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-warns-his-mps-not-to-back-brexit-deal-in-exchange-for-constituency-cash-11623669
Just like the DUP....votes for sale.
I suppose it is just a logical extension of normal business practice in the modern Tory party.
No moral compass, the Maybot is just programmed for corruption.
-
#magicmoneytree
-
Even the right wing Times can see that Brexit is a very bad idea, and why it's looking like going where it's looking like going
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/like-the-fyre-festival-brexit-was-sold-on-lies-and-will-be-a-disaster-hrtvlmnhg?shareToken=d8d2b2716d0a2edd4253a3697729c7b3
-
There is now a bit of thumb twiddling time while May waits for the ERG for the next set of instructions.
-
More about how Arron Banks and Leave.EU trampled over data protection rules in the referendum campaign.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ICOnews/status/1091276923442024449
Turns out by the way, if you ever ever used Moneysupermaket.com to get a car insurance quote, your details were passed on to Banks's insurance company. Who then gave them to Leave.EU (which he funded, using money from the Kremlin). Leave.EU then used those details to send targeted Leave messages to people.
All totally illegal breaches of data protection rules. Hence today's £120k fine.
But hey, I'm sure the lies that they pumped into people's inboxes didn't change any voters' minds.
-
May is now after bribing weak minded Labour rebels:
https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-warns-his-mps-not-to-back-brexit-deal-in-exchange-for-constituency-cash-11623669
Just like the DUP....votes for sale.
I suppose it is just a logical extension of normal business practice in the modern Tory party.
No moral compass, the Maybot is just programmed for corruption.
One of our local ones is quite happy with it. John Mann.
-
Here we go, practical ideas.
Apparently the talk in Brussels around the way to solve the backstop issue is to scrap the transition period and extend Article 50 for 2 years. During which time they will negotiate the future relationship - thus doing away with the need for the backstop.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn
-
John Mann....Jesus wept!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47081988/john-mann-this-is-not-transactional-politics
I expect the folk who voted for a Labour candidate in Bassetlaw are all in favour of:
ignoring the party whip,
disregarding party policy agreed at conference,
preventing colleagues from holding the government to account and stop a no deal exit,
AND
accepting bribes to prop up the Tories.
The Cooper amendment failed by 23 votes.
From Labour, 14 supported Treeza, and 11 abstained.
Do the maths...these people are keeping the Maybot in place, even if that is not their main intention.
Frank Field was up to the same scam, and got a frosty response from a Middlesborough MP.
https://www.newstatesman.com/theresa-may-buy-labour-mp-brexit-deal-support
I look forward to the day that the penny drops about being in opposition!
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47105990
So the PM is now "determined" to do the impossible (sort out leaving in 2 months) and reinvigorated to negotiate in 2 weeks what she couldn't in 2 years.
I never properly understood what WB Yeats meant in his most famous line, about how it's easier to bullshit than to deal with impossible problems, but I'm getting it now.
"The best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity."
That pretty much sums up the past 3 years.
-
I am still hopeful there will be a Peoples Vote
I get that there was a Vote and we voted "out" but as I have said previously the 1976 Ref produced a result of 66% Remain 34% Leave and for 40 years a swathe of Tories (mostly them anyway) carped on and on and on and on etc about Leaving the EEC/EU till they got a Second Ref granted by Cameron
The 2016 Ref produced lets say 52 Out 48 to Stay and however we got to that point and however we got to where we are since that Vote it is clear - that vote is just too divisive to be sustained and though I probably wont be around to see what eventually "pans out" - and it may all be positive - I do think that with a Majority of just 3 or 4 % it is set up for future failure *
I predict (usually badly - look at PvO) that the instant we are out that movers and shakers will immediately start pressure groups to get us back in. If the Leave group did not respect a 33% Maj in 76 why would a Remain (or by then Rejoin) Group respect a piddling 3% Majority ? IMO they would not
So there would be the beginnings of a Join the EU Party - opposite of UKIP I suppose and eventually they would have the support of a sympathetic Parliament and probably get a Third Referendum and who knows may even win to take us back in !
The big difference is having been "out" for however long we would have a better idea of what it was had "happened" to us and the EU in that intervening 10 or 15 years AND if it was detrimental it would be easier to vote Rejoin
So we are where we are - for better or worse - but before we take the next leap why not put whatever "we agree to" as a Nation back to the people ? They may decide again Leave is the option – who knows even maybe by a larger majority ?
Or they may dislike what has been produced and decide Remain is the way to go - but at least the population at large would know - right then - at that point - instead of the estimates being made as to where we stand . This would be especially useful if there has been a shift in the position of the Electorate because if we Leave without testing the waters the Ref result will be forever set as 3 to 4 % and may prove unsustainable * for my reasons above
* As I said previously we might as a Country decide all this fuss WAS worth it after all and be in clover
-
I have found this just now ! Wish I had found it 30 minutes since
Seems to say what I said but go easy on me - that bloke got paid for writing it
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/03/one-day-a-second-peoples-vote-will-bring-us-back-into-the-european-union-the-only-question-is-when?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
-
I am still hopeful there will be a Peoples Vote
I get that there was a Vote and we voted "out" but as I have said previously the 1976 Ref produced a result of 66% Remain 34% Leave and for 40 years a swathe of Tories (mostly them anyway) carped on and on and on and on etc about Leaving the EEC/EU till they got a Second Ref granted by Cameron
The 2016 Ref produced lets say 52 Out 48 to Stay and however we got to that point and however we got to where we are since that Vote it is clear - that vote is just too divisive to be sustained and though I probably wont be around to see what eventually "pans out" - and it may all be positive - I do think that with a Majority of just 3 or 4 % it is set up for future failure *
I predict (usually badly - look at PvO) that the instant we are out that movers and shakers will immediately start pressure groups to get us back in. If the Leave group did not respect a 33% Maj in 76 why would a Remain (or by then Rejoin) Group respect a piddling 3% Majority ? IMO they would not
So there would be the beginnings of a Join the EU Party - opposite of UKIP I suppose and eventually they would have the support of a sympathetic Parliament and probably get a Third Referendum and who knows may even win to take us back in !
The big difference is having been "out" for however long we would have a better idea of what it was had "happened" to us and the EU in that intervening 10 or 15 years AND if it was detrimental it would be easier to vote Rejoin
So we are where we are - for better or worse - but before we take the next leap why not put whatever "we agree to" as a Nation back to the people ? They may decide again Leave is the option – who knows even maybe by a larger majority ?
Or they may dislike what has been produced and decide Remain is the way to go - but at least the population at large would know - right then - at that point - instead of the estimates being made as to where we stand . This would be especially useful if there has been a shift in the position of the Electorate because if we Leave without testing the waters the Ref result will be forever set as 3 to 4 % and may prove unsustainable * for my reasons above
* As I said previously we might as a Country decide all this fuss WAS worth it after all and be in clover
let’s forget if brexit is a good idea or not wolf, let’s say the have another vote and remain win then in 2 years they have another vote and leave wins woukd that be acceptable? You want another vote before we have left you can’t compare it to a vote near 50 years ago
-
We have had another vote since the referendum in the General Election with both major parties manifestos stating they were willing to deliver the out vote.
Even Billy canvassed for the Labour party knowing that, so if you voted for any of the major parties you backed the will of the people in the referendum, or did you not Know what you were voting for?
You should have voted Liberal, green SNP etc. to oppose Brexit.
-
I think you're not getting how General Elections work Selby. GEs aren't single issue events.
-
When an election is prior to an imminent 'disaster' like Brexit, which 'might be worse than WWII for our economy over a long period' resulting in 'no food in the shops', surely the most important single issue above all other issues put together would lead you to back a party that supported a re-vote to stop the 'clusterf**k' happening?
-
BB
Clearly you don't understand how GEs work either.
The LDs didn't have a chance in a million in my constituency. Voting for them would have given the Tories more chance of winning the seat. Since Labour had a far softer approach to Brexit than the Tories did, it would have been totally stupid for me to have voted LD.
Hard isn't it, this messy real life stuff?
-
Well, it's the fault of you and your like-minded constituents for voting tactically instead of for a party that agreed with your desire for a re-vote.
That's the trouble with real life, sometimes you get caught in a landslide with no escape from reality.
-
Mamma Mia - Queen is supposed to be a-political !
-
We have had another vote since the referendum in the General Election with both major parties manifestos stating they were willing to deliver the out vote.
Even Billy canvassed for the Labour party knowing that, so if you voted for any of the major parties you backed the will of the people in the referendum, or did you not Know what you were voting for?
You should have voted Liberal, green SNP etc. to oppose Brexit.
And those MPs that were democratically elected for in 2017 can quite legitimately do whatever they like about Brexit, including having a second referendum or even scrapping it.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47110641
Jesus wept, this is like one of the threads in here on this topic.
EU: If you're leaving the CU and want a trade deal with us, you have to tell us how you plan to ensure the Irish border remains open.
Brexiters: Technology.
EU: What technology, precisely.
Brexiters: Really, REALLY clever technology.
EU: Does this exist yet? Is it operational anywhere in the world?
Brexiters: *mumble*
EU: Right, so we'll need a backstop then, whereby the entire UK stays in the CU for as long as it takes.
Brexiters: Not fair! Not fair!
EU: OK then, tell us what you are proposing instead
Brexiters: Technology.
That's a bang on accurate summary of the past year of negotiations.
Round and round the f**king hamster wheel. A bunch of second rate spivs like Barclay and Javid playing to the Tory party faithful when we need proper statesmen. It is crushingly f**king humiliating to be playing this out in public.
-
Bst who do you propose as going off the latest you gov poll tories are even further ahead now, whatever you say about the tories does that not show you that no matter how bad may does Corbyn will never get in power?
-
I must admit the proposal of a technological solution to the Irish border has long since puzzled me.
Working in an internal audit environment we would get (rightly) lambasted for recommending vague and unhelpful solutions to an issue that we identify. Maybe a technological solution is the new answer! Until that dreaded question raises its head; “what do you mean?”
I’d be really interested to know how technology could be deployed to avoid a hard border. Where would it come into play and what would it do? I gather there’s been some suggestion we could copy the USA / Canada model. But isn’t that a hard border?
What a shambles.
-
Certainly was when I crossed it several times in a few visits
Stayed at Niagara Falls and crossed 3 times into Canada in a day and was grilled each time - and some Daytime Telly progs are dedicated to that "crossing"
By hard border I mean you cant just drive across BUT it is also the longest undefended Border in the World as well meaning you can walk from one to the other all day long. In some spots it is just a 50 yard wide "gap" (approx) made through thick forest and is clearly visible from Plane as you fly over it
-
I must admit the proposal of a technological solution to the Irish border has long since puzzled me.
Working in an internal audit environment we would get (rightly) lambasted for recommending vague and unhelpful solutions to an issue that we identify. Maybe a technological solution is the new answer! Until that dreaded question raises its head; “what do you mean?”
I’d be really interested to know how technology could be deployed to avoid a hard border. Where would it come into play and what would it do? I gather there’s been some suggestion we could copy the USA / Canada model. But isn’t that a hard border?
What a shambles.
And I gather they stop vehicles for around 15 minutes, which would be disastrous.
-
I was stuck at the border at Niagara Falls for 2 hours 15 years back, while they interviewed a bloke on our Greyhound bus with a PLO flag on his rucksack...
-
The NI/Ireland border arrangement is a masterpiece of compromise that underpins the peace process.
The Unionists are satisfied because there IS a border and NI remains part of the UK in law.
The Nationalists are happy because there isn't a border and NI might as well be part of Ireland in practice.
It is a genius arrangement that satisfies two mutually irreconcilable standpoints.
Any change that tipped the balance either way would be a disaster. It would tell one side, "You're opinions are being downgraded and sacrificed." Apart from the moral aspect, that's how you push people into supporting the men with guns.
Plus of course, anything that makes trade across the border harder will hit the economy of Ireland. And why should they have to suffer because of our juvenile emotional spasm of Brexit?
Or, more to the point, if we insist on an arrangement that hurts Ireland, why should we then expect a favourable trade deal from the EU.
But hey! Instead of dealing with these issues, a bunch of chinless wonders from the Tory ranks are currently sat in a room talking about unicorns and fairy dust technology solutions.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47110641
Jesus wept, this is like one of the threads in here on this topic.
EU: If you're leaving the CU and want a trade deal with us, you have to tell us how you plan to ensure the Irish border remains open.
Brexiters: Technology.
EU: What technology, precisely.
Brexiters: Really, REALLY clever technology.
EU: Does this exist yet? Is it operational anywhere in the world?
Brexiters: *mumble*
EU: Right, so we'll need a backstop then, whereby the entire UK stays in the CU for as long as it takes.
Brexiters: Not fair! Not fair!
EU: OK then, tell us what you are proposing instead
Brexiters: Technology.
That's a bang on accurate summary of the past year of negotiations.
Round and round the f**king hamster wheel. A bunch of second rate spivs like Barclay and Javid playing to the Tory party faithful when we need proper statesmen. It is crushingly f**king humiliating to be playing this out in public.
b*llocks.
Brexiteers want GUARANTEES that we can leave the backstop when the technology is up and running.
It will probably be a form of GPS tracking.
-
With a plan as clear as “will probably be a form of GPS tracking” I think you could comfortably enter the negotiating arena right away and provide all the assurances the EU are looking for.
-
GPS tracking of what.??
-
The unicorns on board.
-
Oh aye. Silly me.
This GPS tracking of stuff that is being used or planned for use in frictionless borders precisely nowhere on the planet.
Eee, them bas**rds in Brussels, eh? Not listening to reason and just deliberately giving us shit.
-
Christ.
It's not about the technology currently available.
It's about leaving the backstop WHEN it becomes available.
-
Christ.
It's not about the technology currently available.
It's about leaving the backstop WHEN it becomes available.
Stop just regurgitating 'technology, technology' and tell us what this wonderful technology is actually going to DO to make a border disappear.
If I was the EU, the first question I'd ask of it is 'How will this technology stop contraband from crossing into the Single Market?'
Well, what would you tell them?
-
No. It's not BS.
The problem the ERG has is with the very concept of the backstop.
The mechanism for leaving is straightforward. The backstop keeps NI in the CU until a mechanism is found for making the border frictionless outside the CU.
When that happens, the backstop terminates.
If there is disagreement between the UK and EU over the issue, the Withdrawal Agreement allows for either party to take the issue to an entirely independent arbitration panel.
So. If folk were so certain that the fairy dust high tech solution was around the corner, what problem would they have with the backstop?
The problem, d'oh! is that there isn't a mechanism for making the border frictionless. Either now or off into the far distant future.
So if you sign up to the backstop, you are in it for a long time. So the ERG are against the backstop as a matter of principle. Because even though they are the ones saying technology could sort out the border, they know that it won't. So instead, they say that the UK and the UK alone should have the right to decide what the co ditions at the border are.
Which is fine. Just don't expect the EU to play ball on a future trade deal if we reserve the right to f**k all over one of their members.
THAT is what the issue is. Once again, we've got folk on here passionately supporting the Leave side of the debate whilst not even knowing what the bleeding debate is about.
-
I do understand why Leave supporters don't want to engage on this. It's because 5 mins of thought on this issue utterly destroys the central argument of the Leave side.
The Leave side has consistently told us we can have:
1) A departure from the CU that gives us the right to negotiate our own trade deals with countries outside the EU.
And
2) A trade deal with the EU that mitigates the worst of the economic effects of leaving.
Some of us have spent a good chunk of the past three years trying to point out that you can't have both. Because of the NI border.
That is an inescapable fact. If the EU sticks to its principle of supporting a member who would be hammered by 1, we don't get 2.
We were told to ignore Ireland. We were told that the EU would be begging us for a deal. We were told we held all the cards.
b*llocks. Every word of it.
What the process has done, is to expose the way in which Leave mislead the electorate. And it's also exposed the myth of us having the power to call the shots. In some ways it's the final act of the end of the British Empire. We're having to face up to the fact that we don't carry much weight any more. And for some folk, that's traumatic. So I understand them going into fingers in ears la-la-la mode.
It's a simple as that. It's the refusal to engage with that, by Little Englanders who think the world jumps to attention when we snap our fingers that means we are f**king about discussing non-existent technology, 7 weeks before we leave.
-
I don't understand why our current position is "please amend this clause to give us the right to completely f**k you over whenever we feel like it". It's the Denis Souza of negotiating tactics. Why would the EU want to sign up for this?
-
MM
You missed the follow up.
"And when you've done that, we want a Trade Deal with you that ensures we don't lose out too badly."
It is childishness of monumental proportions.
-
Billy, what are you trying to say?that when you were on the door step you ignored your parties proposals in the published manifesto, because nothing mattered but the single issue of getting back in power, in spite of the parties published intentions of how they were to govern the country.
-
Of course nothing matters but getting into power. That's the entire point of a General Election campaign. It's not some sort of Oxford university debating society.
As it happened, the issue of Brexit didn't come up once in any of the discussions I had on the doorstep. It was a non-issue, because it had effectively been put to bed by the Tories. It's exploded again since then, because the bullshit we were fed by the Leave campaign about how we could have our cake and eat it, how the negotiations were going to be the easiest ever, how we held all the cards etc has been shown to be the bullshit that some of us always knew it was. And now we're in the biggest political crisis since the War. So whatever anyone has said previously matters not one jot. What matters is how we avoid the looming catastrophe NOW.
-
There's probably a reason that the NI backstop never came up on the doorstep during the 2017 GE. It was invented for & by Mrs May when she put down her red lines and then signed up to 'regulatory alignment' for NI in December 2017.
-
And the situation now Billy, are you really interested in what happens to Brexit? or would you take any situation of that problem for Labour to use the situation to gain power?
-
Selby, when you think about it, the only way forward for a party so inadequate that it has Diane Abbott as shadow home secretary, there's little wonder that rather than struggle to portray its own strengths it finds gaining smartie points from ridiculing the opposition is the only way to progress!
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47124058
An apt name for the legal firm don’t you think?
😂😂
-
Selby
I've written my ideas on here several times for what they are worth. I care deeply for the future of places like Donny. It is going to be a grim future after Brexit. I've said several times that no Lab govt could make a difference to the hit that a place like Doncaster will get if we have a hard Brexit.
Given the choice between a hard Brexit and a Lab Govt or no Brexit and no Lab govt I'd take the latter every time. Because I'm interested in the future of our kids, not some sectarian fight.
-
I think it's time we all clubbed together to get BB a cat to kick. It'd be therapeutic.
-
I imagine it'd be more therapeutic than flogging a dead horse.
-
Interesting letter in the Murdoch Times, so called paper of record (behind a paywall);
https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/IMG_20190203_135002.jpg
Treeza and John Mann breaking rocks in the hot sun....now there's a thought!
-
It gets worse....it looks like there may have been some fast and loose with EU State Aid rules:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/04/government-letter-to-nissan-reveals-brexit-promise-to-carmarkers
M'learned friends will be chomping at the bit!
-
Marvellous - thats all I can say
They are all *** lying cheating b*****s (almost to a Man/woman).
A) Flatly denying there was any such deal made to Nissan at the time. At that time we were / still are in austerity or I'm all right jack mode but f**k you lot as they see it
Rubbish collection problems , massive Potholes . Trains disrupted (still waiting for your Pacer Trains being replaced) - sorry no Money "pals"
B) Once caught out they have to come clean and they throw it out there KNOWING that most people wont see it or know what it means or give a flying f**k - and the ones that do can do nowt about it - and have to resort to complaining on Sites like this.
I watched Dr Weasel Fox the other day FLATLY denying he had said getting Trade deals after leaving the EU would be "easy peasy". I cant remember his exact words. Maybe weasily easily knowing him.
Even when confronted with his OWN WORDS / Date / and context he still would not confirm that the Interviewer had "got him" and did what they all do - ignored the direct questions and went on to a " must deliver on the Referendum result" or it will be an affront to Democracy type Speech
*** I mean almost ALL Politicians in most of the Parties - not just selectively picking Tories
-
It gets worse....it looks like there may have been some fast and loose with EU State Aid rules:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/04/government-letter-to-nissan-reveals-brexit-promise-to-carmarkers
M'learned friends will be chomping at the bit!
"Look! These bas**rds couldn't even stick to a deal we lied through our teeth to the country about!!"
-
Jesus wept.
Are there any grown-ups in the government at all?
Even a GCSE Economics student would be useful.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-secret-plan-to-slash-tariffs-on-all-post-brexit-imports_uk_5c587b08e4b00187b553da30?guccounter=1
-
That's the Patrick Minford approach Glyn. He reckons he has an economic model that says that we'd flourish in 10 years if we unilaterally got rid of all tariffs.
Mind, he does freely admit that it would mean the end of British manufacturing. And that we would need the "managed decline of Northern cities" (his own words).
It's not surprising that a swivel eyed right wing ideologue like Fox would go for that. The Northerners who voted for Breitbart served their purpose. Now they can be chewed up and spat out.
Oh aye. And Minford is the economist who bent Thatcher's ear in 1980 and convinced her to massively raise interest rates at the depths of a recession, trebling unemployment and laying much of the North waste. Plus ça f**king change as they say in Europe.
-
Here you go, Brexiter supporters. Here's the one and only leading economist who thinks Brexit is a good idea, telling us what the consequences will be, of the plan that he's sold to Fox.
https://mobile.twitter.com/antoni_UK/status/1054404213504200706
Ever think you've been had?
-
That's the Patrick Minford approach Glyn. He reckons he has an economic model that says that we'd flourish in 10 years if we unilaterally got rid of all tariffs.
Mind, he does freely admit that it would mean the end of British manufacturing. And that we would need the "managed decline of Northern cities" (his own words).
It's not surprising that a swivel eyed right wing ideologue like Fox would go for that. The Northerners who voted for Breitbart served their purpose. Now they can be chewed up and spat out.
Oh aye. And Minford is the economist who bent Thatcher's ear in 1980 and convinced her to massively raise interest rates at the depths of a recession, trebling unemployment and laying much of the North waste. Plus ça f**king change as they say in Europe.
But the icing on the cake is that he thinks it solves the border problem!! Bloody unbelievable. When we start importing all the state-subsidised cheap and nasty Chinese crap without levying not only Customs Duty but also no Anti-Dumping Duty either, does he really think that the EU are just going to sit there and happily let it all flood through a non-existant Irish border into the Single Market?? Absolutely ridiculous.
-
And still the Tories are seen as having a better approach to Brexiters than Labour in the polls.
Where the f**k are the grown ups when you need them?
-
Yes, funny that - seeing as how the Tories appear to have a least 3 different approaches to Brexit depending on who you listen to. Which one do you think is the popular one in the polls?
So I guess all that does it tell you about the power of certain media outlets rather than any particular plan or party.
Great thread on smuggling and the Irish border here btw:
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1092850536095858688
-
Always the last defence of the Left Wilts.
It's always the fault of the media. See. Thing is though. That was entirely predictable. Which is why to be successful, a Left leader has to be a superb communicator.
-
I refer you to post 1433 that I made last night.
-
BB
Yep.
But you're only half right.
Labour's problem is not, for the most part, policies (although there are some I personally disagree with).
For the most part, they have the Tories over a barrel on the detail of policies. So it's unfair to say "gaining smartie points from ridiculing the opposition is the only way to progress".
The problem they have is that Corbyn's inner circle has been shambolicly incompetent at presenting a front of assured confidence on those policies. Corbyn has allowed a situation to emerge where it looks like Labour has no policy on Brexit. Because he's bleeding useless at presenting to anyone on this subject. Because he doesn't actually believe in his own party's policy.
-
Talking about Liam Fox as we were earlier, I missed this gem a couple of days back.
https://www.joe.co.uk/amp/news/no-deal-brexit-would-be-survivable-says-liam-fox-218399
No Deal would be "Survivable". Well whoopy f**king doo, why didn't you just say that all along? It would have given the likes of BS even more ammunition to defend his support of No Deal.
And then he goes on to say that No Deal wouldn't be a catastrophe and it wouldn't be OK. It would be somewhere in between.
Which presumably means something like "bad" or "very bad"?
And we're still considering CHOOSING that as an option ?
He's the Cabinet Minister who is furthest out on the nutter anti-EU fringe. And the best he can say about No Deal is that it wouldn't quite be a catastrophe, and we could survive it.
And still, 30 percent of folk in this country think that's what we should choose.
And when some of us point out the implications, in an attempt to get folk to wake up to what we're racing into, we're accused of being condescending and hurting people's feelings.
f**king odd times we live in...
-
Tusk just Tweeted this.
"I've been wondering what that special place in hell looks like, for those who promoted #Brexit, without even a sketch of a plan how to carry it out safely."
But remember, they need us more than we need them!
-
Just seen it. That's the final nail in the coffin for any hope of remain. Feeds right into the nationalistis mindset of the 17 million. And probably a lot more.
-
Doesn't help that the BBC are wilfully misinterpreting his words in their headline.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47143135
That is disgraceful journalism.
-
Just seen it. That's the final nail in the coffin for any hope of remain. Feeds right into the nationalistis mindset of the 17 million. And probably a lot more.
Exactly this, it's not what he tweeted that's the biggest issue (though I find that incredibly unhelpful and childish), but his off camera sniggers with the Irish PM have just backed up exactly what narrative people like Farage attempt to use about the EU and in some ways it's hard to disagree with that. These things are incredibly complex and political but to publicly appear to be sniggering at a member country is astounding.
This point;
And at the end of their press conference, Mr Varadkar was picked up by the microphones telling Mr Tusk: "They'll give you terrible trouble, the British, for this."
Mr Tusk nodded at the comment and both laughed.
It's almost as if he finds the whole thing a funny game - unbelievable, and they wonder why there are so many anti EU people.
-
BFYP
Aye. But Tusk is doing nothing but telling the truth. Every single step of the way over the past 2.5 years, the Brexit advocates have been shown to have no plans for dealing with the process of Leaving. Tusk is absolutely correct to state that explicitly, and if he has a grim laugh about it, that is understandable. They reached a deal with May. May is now reneging on that with just days to go.
We're in a rather serious crisis now. If we British respond to this by complaining about it hurting our feelings, then frankly, we get what we deserve.
-
Plus, of course, it's rich hearing Brexiters complaining about this.
Senior politicians who have spent years comparing the EU to the USSR, to Nazi Germany, accusing them of giving out punishment beatings to us over Brexit, saying that they would beg us for a deal, saying the EU president has "the charisma of a damp rag and appearance of a low-wage bank clerk", floating plans to bully Ireland into backing down by cutting off gas supplies. These same politicians now screaming that it's not fair to insult us when they tell us the truth.
It's us saying that we can insult you constantly for years, but don't you ever say anything back to us. Utterly pathetic.
-
I get that BST and frankly largely agree. My point is he is living up to the 'bad guy' persona some press and politicians wish to create for the eu.
Frankly it just doesn't help him. Remaining professional allows him not to appear obstructive, to appear as a strong leader and to play the grown up card against the UK government.
The point is you could argue he's stooped to a low level that he didn't need to, one that allows the view of the eu to be just that bit more negative, which won't help his pro eu aims.
-
You would think grown-ups would lead by example, wouldn't you?
-
I'll sum up your arguments.
WE reserve the right to be as f**king childish as we like.
YOU must always be courteous and professional, no matter how much we provoke you. Because Brexit supporters are pwecious widdle snowflakes.
Has no one on here ever got exasperated at dealing with long term tantrums?
-
I'll sum up your arguments.
WE reserve the right to be as f**king childish as we like.
YOU must always be courteous and professional, no matter how much we provoke you. Because Brexit supporters are pwecious widdle snowflakes.
Has no one on here ever got exasperated at dealing with long term tantrums?
Yes, me, reading this thread.
-
I'll sum up your arguments.
WE reserve the right to be as f**king childish as we like.
YOU must always be courteous and professional, no matter how much we provoke you. Because Brexit supporters are pwecious widdle snowflakes.
Has no one on here ever got exasperated at dealing with long term tantrums?
Summed up incorrectly.
I personally feel they should all act like bloody adults not just one side. My point was and is, publicly Tusk has lost that moral highground.....
-
We're a little over 7 weeks out, and there's still no plan. I suspect that, to the sort of person who's still blindly cheerleading Brexit at this point, Tusk never had the high ground in the first place.
-
BFYP
My point is that the politicians who are trying to stir the shit over this are precisely the ones who have built their careers on factually incorrect insults aimed at the EU. By comparison, the comments we get back the other way are relatively mild. And far, far fewer in number.
But yes, he probably shouldn't have said it. He was having a reasonable pop at POLITICIANS who have consistently misled the British people, but it was inevitable that those same politicians would spin it as him having a go at Brexit VOTERS (ably assisted by that disgraceful BBC website headline earlier, which i see they've now corrected). There's a special circle of Hell reserved for politicians who whip up fury in that way too.
-
I see the DUP are keeping it all in proportion.
The Democratic Unionist Party's Brexit spokesman Sammy Wilson said: "This devilish Euro maniac is doing his best to keep the United Kingdom bound by the chains of EU bureaucracy and control.
These Papists eh?
-
Why have the likes of Tusk and his bourgeois Luxembourg counterpart even been given the roles they have, is it because they are nothing more than a pair of Aunt Sally's who can easily be discarded when it all goes belly up.
-
Interesting to see the Germans have taken up the mantle of leading the new EU military Force ,it's a pity that they will need about 4 years to replace all of their nackered old kit, and boy will they have to dig deep to fund it! Apart from also having to prop up France, Italy, Spain, Greece etc
-
Wow, tusk, wow.
The childish ramblings of a desparate man, trying to hold together a failing political empire.
29th of March is gonna be sweet.
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
-
The irony in all of this, is the likes of Nigel Farage and Mark Francois are happy doing the rounds on the media showing outrage on Tusk calling them out for not having a plan, whilst still not telling anyone their plan.
-
Wow, tusk, wow.
The childish ramblings of a desparate man, trying to hold together a failing political empire.
29th of March is gonna be sweet.
Funny how you didn't notice the insults he gave the Remainers.
-
You'll look a reight bell end celebrating on 29 March BS.
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
Sydney we live in a Democracy once we are free of the shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels we can choose our own destiny,if The Maybot does not live up to our expectations we can vote Her party out of power which is what happened in 1997 sadly the alternative leaves much to be desired at the moment, but we can all live in hope that it will sort itself out in the not too distant future!
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
Sydney we live in a Democracy once we are free of the shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels we can choose our own destiny,if The Maybot does not live up to our expectations we can vote Her party out of power which is what happened in 1997 sadly the alternative leaves much to be desired at the moment, but we can all live in hope that it will sort itself out in the not too distant future!
Sproty,
Can you give me one example of what freedom you don't personally enjoy because of the 'shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels'.
However, if you wrote the above in satire. It's very good.
-
Fascinating, seeing the response from Brexiters to Tusk's comments today.
How it doesn't help.
How it's discourteous. Spiteful even.
How it shows that we should be rid of these bullies.
All those responses are underpinned by a very particular viewpoint.
That it's all about us.
That it's our response and our feelings and our pride that matters. That the EU leaders should take into account what we Brits feel, before speak.
But here's a funny thing. There's 27 other countries and 450 million people who are staying in the EU.
Maybe, just maybe, Tusk was also communicating his exasperation to THEM, given that he's had to deal with our bunch of maniacs for 2 years.
Maybe he's talking to the other 450million people. Pointing out to the rest of the EU, the clusterf**k you lead your country into if you listen to the bullshit and the bluster and the bravado that convinced folk to vote for Brexit?
See, cos when our politicians chuck nasty insults at Brussels, we Brits assume they are communicating to us. We don't talk much about the effect those words have on opinions in the rest of Europe. But when Tusk or Juncker speak, we assume they also are aiming their words at us, not at the rest of the EU.
It's a peculiar form of narcissism.
Maybe, just maybe, there's other folk out there. Not just us Brits. That would be a thing, wouldn't it?
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
Sydney we live in a Democracy once we are free of the shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels we can choose our own destiny,if The Maybot does not live up to our expectations we can vote Her party out of power which is what happened in 1997 sadly the alternative leaves much to be desired at the moment, but we can all live in hope that it will sort itself out in the not too distant future!
Sproty,
Can you give me one example of what freedom you don't personally enjoy because of the 'shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels'.
However, if you wrote the above in satire. It's very good.
Is it irony Sproty? cause the "twits in Brussels'' is us, twits-r-us, because we as a member nation were party to the plans, we have as much a say as any other nation.
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
Sydney we live in a Democracy once we are free of the shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels we can choose our own destiny,if The Maybot does not live up to our expectations we can vote Her party out of power which is what happened in 1997 sadly the alternative leaves much to be desired at the moment, but we can all live in hope that it will sort itself out in the not too distant future!
This kind of post always makes me laugh. The vast majority of laws past we actually have happily voted with the EU to bring in. Were then looking at copying and pasting these same rules going forward. Then you have companies in the US that when Brexit happens are hoping to influence changes in our laws on animal welfare and food standards for the worse.
-
Wow, tusk, wow.
The childish ramblings of a desparate man, trying to hold together a failing political empire.
29th of March is gonna be sweet.
It's true though? No Brexiteer has ever offered a solution or any ideas to the problem. They're all in hiding and ready to moan when it doesn't go their way.
-
I thought May had promised to maintain workers rights a couple of years ago? So having been exposed as not protecting workers rights she want to legislate to protect rights that should already be protected.
What is to stop a Conservative party in the future trashing this, nothing, without the protection of the EU workers will be in a weakened state subjected to greedy employers forcing wages and conditions down once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/may-to-woo-labour-with-law-giving-uk-workers-same-rights-as-in-eu
Back in 2016
''Doubts cast on Theresa May's pledge to protect workers' rights post-Brexit''
''The prime minister made a pledge to stick to EU protections such as guarantees of paid holiday, maternity and paternity rights and time off in between shifts. But an examination of her past statements on workers’ rights reveals that she repeatedly attacked the then Labour government’s decision to sign up to the EU’s social chapter when the Conservatives were in opposition''
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/07/doubts-cast-on-theresa-mays-pledge-to-protect-workers-rights-post-brexit
Sydney we live in a Democracy once we are free of the shackles enforced on us by the Twits in Brussels we can choose our own destiny,if The Maybot does not live up to our expectations we can vote Her party out of power which is what happened in 1997 sadly the alternative leaves much to be desired at the moment, but we can all live in hope that it will sort itself out in the not too distant future!
This kind of post always makes me laugh. The vast majority of laws past we actually have happily voted with the EU to bring in. Were then looking at copying and pasting these same rules going forward. Then you have companies in the US that when Brexit happens are hoping to influence changes in our laws on animal welfare and food standards for the worse.
As a postscript May should not have to woo anyone to proclaim workers rights, workers rights should be written in stone as a non negotiable part of our society.
-
Wow, tusk, wow.
The childish ramblings of a desparate man, trying to hold together a failing political empire.
29th of March is gonna be sweet.
It's true though? No Brexiteer has ever offered a solution or any ideas to the problem. They're all in hiding and ready to moan when it doesn't go their way.
Dont forget they DID have plans initially - like how much they would give the NHS - where they kindly painted it on a Bus for us all to see
How they would reclaim all our Borders and "curb" the immigration
How they would make us great again
How doing a Trade deal would be "as easy as sliced bread" ( Dr Weasel oops Fox )
Wonder what happened between then and now ? As you say they have turned into Chameleons and vanished or like Gove have morphed into something different while keeping his own future "alive"
-
Good to see Corbyn sticking firm to Labour party policy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremycorbyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
For the record, Labour's agreed policy at conference last year was.
Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.
If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.
Corbyn's letter last night drives a coach and horses through that second paragraph.
Odd isn't it? Corbyn has spent his life pushing the Bennite idea that Labour members should determine policy, and that Labour leaders should follow that policy. Surely, he didn't mean that only applies when Labour's members vehemently disagree with HIM?
-
Good to see Corbyn sticking firm to Labour party policy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremycorbyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
For the record, Labour's agreed policy at conference last year was.
Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.
If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.
Corbyn's letter last night drives a coach and horses through that second paragraph.
Odd isn't it? Corbyn has spent his life pushing the Bennite idea that Labour members should determine policy, and that Labour leaders should follow that policy. Surely, he didn't mean that only applies when Labour's members vehemently disagree with HIM?
Corbyn says for labor support: the changes to the political declaration must include:
A “permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union”, including a say in future trade deals.
Close alignment with the single market, underpinned by “shared institutions”.
“Dynamic alignment on rights and protections”, so that UK standards do not fall behind those of the EU.
Clear commitments on future UK participation in EU agencies and funding programmes.
Unambiguous agreements on future security arrangements, such as use of the European arrest warrant.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/corbyn-lays-out-labours-terms-for-backing-may-on-brexit
-
Good to see Corbyn sticking firm to Labour party policy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremycorbyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
For the record, Labour's agreed policy at conference last year was.
Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.
If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.
Corbyn's letter last night drives a coach and horses through that second paragraph.
Odd isn't it? Corbyn has spent his life pushing the Bennite idea that Labour members should determine policy, and that Labour leaders should follow that policy. Surely, he didn't mean that only applies when Labour's members vehemently disagree with HIM?
I'd have said that Corbyn's letter is one of those options ion the table.
-
Yes Glyn, but it's interesting that he can't bring himself to so much as mention the one option specifically named in that resolution.
Meanwhile...https://mobile.twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1093244208750587905
As I've been saying for 2 years, Corbyn's nightmare is when he has to decide what he actually stands for on Brexit. The polling strength of Labour over the past 2 years (such as it is, and it's not much when against The Worst Govt In History) has been based on a con. It's been based on Corbyn's prevarication allowing both Leave and Remain Labour supporters to think that he's on their side.
This was always a fragile position. When Labour finally comes out one way or another, they lose support. It's just that if they come out in favour of facilitating Brexiters (and let's be grown up - we all KNOW that's what Corbyn has wanted for 40 years) the loss of support will be devastating. As bad as the Iraq War for New Labour. As bad as Tuition Fees for the LDs.
A reight bleeding mess.
-
Wow, tusk, wow.
The childish ramblings of a desparate man, trying to hold together a failing political empire.
29th of March is gonna be sweet.
Funny how you didn't notice the insults he gave the Remainers.
I did. He seems to have given up on them, which probably explains his frustration. That said, I don't think Tusk's remarks were wise. The temperature hardly needs raising, and he's allowed the Brexiteers to say "I told you so."
-
Good to see Corbyn sticking firm to Labour party policy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremycorbyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
For the record, Labour's agreed policy at conference last year was.
Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.
If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.
Corbyn's letter last night drives a coach and horses through that second paragraph.
Odd isn't it? Corbyn has spent his life pushing the Bennite idea that Labour members should determine policy, and that Labour leaders should follow that policy. Surely, he didn't mean that only applies when Labour's members vehemently disagree with HIM?
One of Keir Starmer's lieutenants has now said that if May fails to respond to Corbyn's proposal they will push for a second vote. Clarification, maybe, but you have to wonder why Corbyn's letter didn't include that.
-
TRB
As I said, we're looking at this and judging what he should and shouldn't say from the UK end of a very long telescope.
It's not all about us...
-
I think Corbyn's intervention means Tusk's remarks will soon be forgotten. He seems to have upset his Remainers while not satisfying those who want Norway-Plus.
-
As I also say TRB, there are days I wonder if Corbyn is a long term plant by the Tories to destroy the Labour party.
Back in December, a YG poll said Labour support drops from 36% to 22% if they support Brexit in a GE. A couple of days later, Corbyn writes a piece in the papers saying he wants a GE and he would campaign supporting Brexit.
Last week, the TSSA had polling done which they passed onto Momentum. It said that supporting Leave would be as bad for Labour as the Iraq War. A few days later, Corbyn writes a letter to May offering a process by which Labour will facilitate Leave.
It's utterly perverse.
But if course, those who have drunk the Holy Water of the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy are certain it's a brilliantly conceived plan to...
...well it doesn't matter what it's designed to do. It's Jeremy's idea therefore it must be infallible.
-
Pretty grim report by the Bank of England today.
GDP is 1.5% lower now than they had predicted it would be by now, back in early 2016.
And that anemic growth that we have had is rapidly slowing. Growth in 2019 is predicted to be the lowest since the Great Recession.
1/4 chance of a recession, even if we have a sensible, orderly Brexit. That prospect goes up significantly with No Deal.
Only 50% of firms are prepared for No Deal. Of those, being "prepared" means doing what they can to mitigate the worst of the effects.
There you go lads. That's what you've foisted on the country.
Congratu-f**king-lations.
-
I might be wrong but I feel that hopes of a second referendum are dwindling by the day.
I just don't see it happening now.
-
Pretty grim report by the Bank of England today.
GDP is 1.5% lower now than they had predicted it would be by now, back in early 2016.
And that anemic growth that we have had is rapidly slowing. Growth in 2019 is predicted to be the lowest since the Great Recession.
1/4 chance of a recession, even if we have a sensible, orderly Brexit. That prospect goes up significantly with No Deal.
Only 50% of firms are prepared for No Deal. Of those, being "prepared" means doing what they can to mitigate the worst of the effects.
There you go lads. That's what you've foisted on the country.
Congratu-f**king-lations.
Of course you could counter that argument by looking at the other eu economy's..Germany has today reduced it's growth forcast by 45%,a massive amount..A latest Poll in France indicates 40% would now back leave if they had a refendum tomorrow,which is also a massive jump...
We can all taylor figures to suit our views bst
-
I might be wrong but I feel that hopes of a second referendum are dwindling by the day.
I just don't see it happening now.
I've thought so ever since Corbyn lost his No-Confidence vote the other week. That was the moment for the Labour Front Bench to swing behind Ref2, on the basis there wasn't going to be a General Election any time soon.
Although I think from a practical point of view there would be no consensus about what should go on the ballot paper.
-
Wing Co
Aye but that misses a rather large point.
For 2.5 years since the vote, the rest of the world has enjoyed a boom while our growth has stagnated. They've all been getting richer while we stood still.
That was never going to go on forever. Booms never do. Now here comes the global slowdown and it's going to hit us just like it'll hit everyone else. Except harder, because we haven't had the proceeds of the boom to cushion the effect.
It's all out there. Established fact. No one is lifting your shirt over this.
-
Wing I
Here you go by the way. This is what has happened to European economies over the past few years.
(http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/4475bea7470a6ad0.png)
We've averaged about 1% lower growth than the EU since 2016, having been in better shape than them before that.
1% lower GDP growth for 3 years means that we have already lost £60bn of growth. And for every year that we don't pick up, we'll lose a further £30bn.
You're a business man. Don't those numbers appal you?
-
BST,
The point about the 5 conditions letter from Corbyn to May is that it is strategic.
The goal is political, to either break the logjam, or demonstrate before the next meaningful vote that the HoC must take control from May.
May cannot meet the terms with her current deal, and to change her position to do so means she must face down the ERG.
See it as a move in the chess game to create a new range of options next round.
-
Why do people (MPs mainly) insist on calling the 2016 Referendum "extremely decisive" or " it produced a large majority" or even worse " it was the largest democratic excerise the UK has ever undertaken and 17'4 million people voted overwhelmingly to Leave"
OK so Remain won but those criteria above go nowhere near the reality.
The Vote was divisive - the Vote was close. Thats my take and I have never changed my mind
-
Wing I
Here you go by the way. This is what has happened to European economies over the past few years.
(http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/4475bea7470a6ad0.png)
We've averaged about 1% lower growth than the EU since 2016, having been in better shape than them before that.
1% lower GDP growth for 3 years means that we have already lost £60bn of growth. And for every year that we don't pick up, we'll lose a further £30bn.
You're a business man. Don't those numbers appal you?
"Forget new trade deals – Britain’s struggling to keep the ones it has''
Anyone still labouring under the misapprehension that the UK will in any way shape or form be better off following brexit should tell us how that could possibly happen, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, there is no pot of gold, there are no rewards, just about everything in everyone's lives will be affected-for the worse. The house of cards is on fire.
As the deadline rushes up and reality bites and the truth is revealed absolute chaos.
“Global Britain” advocates often fail to acknowledge the long list of countries the UK already has free trade agreements (FTAs) with, by virtue of its EU membership. The EU’s trade partners include Turkey, Israel, Morocco, South Korea, South Africa, Chile, Mexico and, more recently, Canada and Japan
And these agreements matter to British business: up to 15% of UK exports are to countries the EU already has a trade agreement with. It is of little surprise that the Brexit priority for most British businesses – after securing a deep relationship with the UK’s most important trading partner, the EU – is not future free trade agreements with the US, New Zealand and others, but replacing those that already exist''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/07/trade-deals-britain-liam-fox-brexit
-
Albie
Yeah. I'll buy that. I've seen that argument doing the rounds.
Big problem for Labour though, is the message it is sending to its supporters and members, most of whom are very much against Brexit. Corbyn's approval ratings are dropping through the floor and are now at levels which are lower than Hague, Major or Brown had at their lowest points. That's not entirely due to Brexiters (Salisbury and anti-Semitism played a part too) but his appearance of going in a different direction on Brexiters than his members and party supporters is becoming crippling. See that TSSA poll for example.
The image of him being a Brexiters facilitator is getting hard baked. It's a very serious problem going forward. Even if he truly is playing a very sophisticated game here (which, frankly, I doubt).
-
On those GDP figures, remember that the current stagnation comes after half a decade of very poor growth because of the insanity of Austerity. It all adds up to a historically poor decade. None of us alive today have seen our economy behave so poorly for so long. The fact that that is due to conscious decisions taken by the country is heartbreaking.
-
Corbyn is in a difficult place, because the members and many Labour voters want different things;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/19/labour-would-lose-voters-with-stop-brexit-policy-poll-suggests
With the next round of amendments to the "revised" May deal, the numbers trend will hopefully become clearer.
The problem at the moment remains a lack of HoC support for Ref2. Until that changes it is difficult to see it as viable.
Things will change.....to what is not yet clear!
-
Albie
Come on. You can do better than to scrat around to find something that looks like it supports your case.
Have a look beyond the headline.
What in that article says anything whatsoever about Labour voters (current or potential) wanting different things? Or about it being a problem if Labour pushed against Brexit?
-
BST,
The point is we don't know the impact on voters....you don't, I don't and nor does anyone else.
Personally I think all polling is old school hocus pocus(since about 2010), and out of date within a short time span.
So the question becomes do you push the boat out and find you were completely wrong. No politician would take that risk.
The same dynamic is playing out in the Tories. May cannot satisfy all sections of her party, and knows the members will go for a Boris type in her place, given the chance.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Its a balancing act, where you move across shifting sands on the basis of probabilities.
-
You think polling is hocus pocus, so you post a link to a story about polls?
See, I've been there. In June 1983 I was completely certain that the polls were wrong. Reality has a way of bringing you up short.
Polls do get the detail wrong. That's inevitable. But if poll after poll is saying that Corbyn's approval rating is in the low 20s, me? I'd start to think about whether Corbyn might actually be really unpopular out there.
And if poll after poll said that supporting Brexiters would hit Labour far harder than opposing it, I might start to wonder whether having a leader who has wanted Brexiters for 40 years was a wise position.
That's just me though. I'm sure Jeremy knows what he's doing.
-
The Populus poll was linked simply to show that there is great uncertainty about outcomes.
Whether it is accurate or not we don't know, but it flags up the general issue of predicting reliable consequences from policy statements.
The media are adept at tying you down to positions taken before a key change of context.
In a fluid situation, the most important consideration is to avoid being boxed in.
If Labour were to pitch for Ref2 now, it would allow May to present Ref2 as a Labour ploy to sidestep brexit, and consolidate her own position.
Corbyn is trying to isolate May from the warring factions within her party. The letter to May is really a letter to ConReb, and the EU.
It might work...it might not.
Lets not rush to judgment before next set of votes, eh!
Ps.
The time series on party positions in the polls is averaging around the 40% for both, give or take.
We know from recent elections that the polls are proving a less reliable indicator than in earlier years.
-
" The Financial Times says secret plans for the UK economy in the event of a no-deal Brexit include cutting taxes "
Why Tories are desperate for a no deal brexit in a nutshell
-
Commonsense amongst the chaos ...................
''End uncertainty over no-deal Brexit, says ex-civil service chief.
Lord Kerslake, the former head of the civil service, has urged the government to rule out a no-deal Brexit, saying ministers had the power to do so, to end the uncertainty that is gripping business and local government services.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4, Kerslake also called for a fresh referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, which he admitted might take as a long as a year to organise''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/end-uncertainty-over-no-deal-brexit-says-ex-civil-service-chief-lord-kerslake
-
Yep, I'll accept that GE polls have been poor of late. That's to some extent due to the fact that the last three GEs have seen extraordinary circumstances. (Clegg-mania in 2010, the collapse of the LDs and rise of UKIP and the SNP in 2015, the collapse of UKIP in 2017). Those circumstances make it hard for pollsters to predict the result because of the fluidity of the electorate.
We're back in much more conventional times now, in England and Wales at least, with there being only two major parties.
All of that is irrelevant to the main thrust of my argument though.
1) All polling shows that Labour takes a very bad hit if it supports Brexit. The same polls show a much lesser impact (in some cases, none) for supporting Ref2.
2)Corbyn is at historically dreadful approval levels. Not just bad. Shockingly bad. It's really simple. No politician who goes through a period of 20% approval ratings is going great to get to No10. Because in practice, our system is quasi-presidential. When people go to vote, a good chunk of them are going to be thinking of who they want as PM. And Corbyn's performance over the past year has been dreadful, in terms of reaching out past the convinced. He's poured away the boost he got through his excellent campaigning in 2017 (Hey! If only he'd been that passionate in 2016...) That aspect of him has already been priced in. But his handling of Salisbury, the Jewish issue and Brexit has seen support for him draining away. I don't see much of that coming flooding back. Because even if we do have Ref2, he'll not get credit for it. Because it's clear from every breath he breathes that he doesn't want it.
-
Here's the US perspective on out 'taking back control'
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/us-lobbyists-brexit_uk_5c5b26c6e4b00187b5579f64?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
-
and here's another
https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/02/08/leave-campaigners-self/
-
But it's not all doom and gloom. Just look at the jobs being created by Brexit -
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/brexit-no-deal-crisis-command-centre-starts-hiring-civilians
You couldn't make it up!
-
''Labour MPs who back Tory Brexit face moment of reckoning, say activists, Labour activists are to target 30 Labour MPs with warnings of “a moment of reckoning” including deselections unless they vote down any Brexit deal brought by Theresa May, organising phone banks and campaign days to pile pressure on MPs''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/07/labour-mps-who-back-tory-brexit-face-moment-of-reckoning-say-activists
Anything that will stop Brexit, go for it.
-
Anybody wanting Brexit after reading the above truly wants his/her head seeing to .
People of Doncaster, NONE of this is in your best interests .
-
Well.
Good historians, when they write about monumental events, often find little anecdotes that capture the spirit of the time.
When the events are tragic, they might pick a grimly humourous little story.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47182361
Future historians of Brexit will be spoilt for f**king choice, but this shambles won't be far from the top of the list.
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
63% of the electorate didn't vote for Brexit in the referendum
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
63% of the electorate didn't vote for Brexit in the referendum
But the ones who could be bothered getting off their backsides won the vote.
-
A spot of light reading & a warning to Brexiteers that to make sure Brexit happens on 29th March - remove the metal bits from your bras....
https://bylinetimes.com/2019/01/29/brexit-has-become-a-doomsday-cult/
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
-
There are polls most weeks asking if people think the decision to leave was right or wrong.
Immediately after the vote, there were big majorities saying it was right.
As the clusterf**k has gathered pace, it's flipped round. In the last 18 months there have been 70 polls. ONE had a majority saying the decision was right.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Since the referendum it has been down to our politicians to “deal with” Brexit..
How have they managed??
Regardless of the referendum result the whole thing has since been a rolling goat f**k, I really can’t imagine anyone being happy with the situation now..
Can you.? So how should we just deal with it.??
Get your fingers out of your ears, and your head out of the f**king sand.
-
Wasting your time IDM.
You're not going to change the minds of folk like AL. There's about 25% of the population who are utterly immune to any rational discussion on the topic.
The job is to get folk who actually engage with thinking about Brexit to realise the consequences.
-
As I also say TRB, there are days I wonder if Corbyn is a long term plant by the Tories to destroy the Labour party.
Back in December, a YG poll said Labour support drops from 36% to 22% if they support Brexit in a GE. A couple of days later, Corbyn writes a piece in the papers saying he wants a GE and he would campaign supporting Brexit.
Last week, the TSSA had polling done which they passed onto Momentum. It said that supporting Leave would be as bad for Labour as the Iraq War. A few days later, Corbyn writes a letter to May offering a process by which Labour will facilitate Leave.
It's utterly perverse.
But if course, those who have drunk the Holy Water of the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy are certain it's a brilliantly conceived plan to...
...well it doesn't matter what it's designed to do. It's Jeremy's idea therefore it must be infallible.
When I talk about Corbyn in quasi-religious terms, it's obviously for comedic effect. Pointing out that Corbynistas are so averse to accepting any criticism of their man, that it's as though they consider him to be the Son of God.
Of course, I don't REALLY think that they hold him up as a saintly icon. It's just a technique to highlight the lack of critical appraisal going on.
And then THIS today from the head of the Communications Workers Union.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveWardGS/status/1094514205565300736
Corbyn was put on this earth to right all wrongs apparently.
-
''Chris Grayling’s glassy-eyed confidence doesn’t help with Brexit debacle''
''as psychologists term it, an unconscious incompetent''
''Will Grayling go? In less chaotic times, with a governing party united and in control of events, a prime minister would surely not give him the choice. Yet Grayling appears to genuinely believe he sees things clearer than those around him: as psychologists term it, an unconscious incompetent, the worst kind of useless. Those who have watched Grayling deny all responsibility for the dysfunction of the railways – even to the point where he blamed others for an industry board he had just established and appointments he had personally overseen – won’t be putting much money on him doing the decent thing''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/09/chris-grayling-transport-glassy-eyed-confidence-doesnt-help-with-brexit-debacle
-
I've just noticed that one of Theresa May's closest political allies over Brexiters is called James Brokenshire.
How apt. I wonder if she has another ally called Peter f**kedupnation.
-
As I also say TRB, there are days I wonder if Corbyn is a long term plant by the Tories to destroy the Labour party.
Back in December, a YG poll said Labour support drops from 36% to 22% if they support Brexit in a GE. A couple of days later, Corbyn writes a piece in the papers saying he wants a GE and he would campaign supporting Brexit.
Last week, the TSSA had polling done which they passed onto Momentum. It said that supporting Leave would be as bad for Labour as the Iraq War. A few days later, Corbyn writes a letter to May offering a process by which Labour will facilitate Leave.
It's utterly perverse.
But if course, those who have drunk the Holy Water of the Church of the Blessed St Jeremy are certain it's a brilliantly conceived plan to...
...well it doesn't matter what it's designed to do. It's Jeremy's idea therefore it must be infallible.
When I talk about Corbyn in quasi-religious terms, it's obviously for comedic effect. Pointing out that Corbynistas are so averse to accepting any criticism of their man, that it's as though they consider him to be the Son of God.
Of course, I don't REALLY think that they hold him up as a saintly icon. It's just a technique to highlight the lack of critical appraisal going on.
And then THIS today from the head of the Communications Workers Union.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveWardGS/status/1094514205565300736
Corbyn was put on this earth to right all wrongs apparently.
Yes agreed. Corbyn (although the letter was actually written in conjunction with Starmer) proposing a compromise deal that is welcomed by organisations such as:
the EU - https://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1093567779888943106
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-jeremy-corbyn-verhofstadt-labour-european-parliament-theresa-may-backstop-a8767931.html
the Financial Times - https://www.ft.com/content/bfc55820-2ace-11e9-88a4-c32129756dd8
the CBI - Caroline Fairburn on Sophy Ridge this am
moderate Tories - https://twitter.com/NickBoles
trade experts - https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK
...is disgraceful. How dare he! Sorting out Brexit - the b*****d. Seems it's not only Corbynistas that don't like compromise.
There is however one major flaw to his plan - what will he do if May accepts it?
-
More Whataboutery Wilts.
-
Wasting your time IDM.
You're not going to change the minds of folk like AL. There's about 25% of the population who are utterly immune to any rational discussion on the topic.
The job is to get folk who actually engage with thinking about Brexit to realise the consequences.
you don’t discuss things thou bst, what you do is when someone puts any link up you don’t agree with you discredit whoever wrote it or you say look behind the headline, yet when you post stuff everything is off who you believe to be credible, albie posted that some labour want different things which could cause a problem and he is right, there are many labour voters who 1 won’t vote labour if Corbyn is leader and 2 if they go against brexit even if it does not say it in any link you no it to be true
-
Bpool
A bit tough to follow that brain dump, but I think what you're saying is precisely what I've been saying for the past 18 months.
-
Wasting your time IDM.
You're not going to change the minds of folk like AL. There's about 25% of the population who are utterly immune to any rational discussion on the topic.
The job is to get folk who actually engage with thinking about Brexit to realise the consequences.
you don’t discuss things thou bst, what you do is when someone puts any link up you don’t agree with you discredit whoever wrote it or you say look behind the headline, yet when you post stuff everything is off who you believe to be credible, albie posted that some labour want different things which could cause a problem and he is right, there are many labour voters who 1 won’t vote labour if Corbyn is leader and 2 if they go against brexit even if it does not say it in any link you no it to be true
Well er are you suggesting he should post things from people who he doesn't believe to be credible?...
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
Yes. The silent majority.
-
Wasting your time IDM.
You're not going to change the minds of folk like AL. There's about 25% of the population who are utterly immune to any rational discussion on the topic.
The job is to get folk who actually engage with thinking about Brexit to realise the consequences.
I don't care about the so called consequences. I voted for Brexit and that's what I want to see.
-
Aye. Precisely.
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
Yes. The silent majority.
How do you know? Have they told you?
-
Wasting your time IDM.
You're not going to change the minds of folk like AL. There's about 25% of the population who are utterly immune to any rational discussion on the topic.
The job is to get folk who actually engage with thinking about Brexit to realise the consequences.
I don't care about the so called consequences. I voted for Brexit and that's what I want to see.
Brexit in a nutshell. maybe they should put that on the side of a bus!
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
Yes. The silent majority.
How do you know? Have they told you?
No, they were silent.
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
Yes. The silent majority.
How do you know? Have they told you?
No, they were silent.
Axholme, that is probably the best post you have made on here.
-
Hound.
It's the feed line that requires the genius in any comedy partnership.
-
AL.
Oh! Bugger me! I did not spot that...
-
Brexit is happening. Deal with it. Just because a handful of you on here don't want it, don't think you represent the majority of people in the country.
Do you think it's still the majority opinion?
Yes. The silent majority.
How do you know? Have they told you?
No, they were silent.
Axholme, that is probably the best post you have made on here.
I thank you all. You've been a wonderful audience.
-
AL.
Oh! Bugger me! I did not spot that...
:)
-
Well, that's me owned then, int it?
-
This might well be the most thoughtful, subtle and poignant assessment of Brexit to date.
https://mobile.twitter.com/OFAHCentral/status/1085276716317200384
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47206303
So the Govt that gave a contract to provide freight crossing over the Channel to a company that had never operated a boat, running services out of a harbour that couldn't service ships is now being sued by the operator of a railway line under the Channel that says it could have provided the service if someone had picked up the phone.
Still, it's alright. We ARE giving £90m of UK taxpayers' money to a French company and a Danish company to plan for services that will never be needed. That's showing them Europeans what we mean by Taking Back Control.
Actually, seriously. What sort of monumental car crash f**k up does a Cabinet Minister have to be responsible for to lose their job these days. Not so long ago, Grayling would have been hoyed out the door weeks ago for this shambles. Now it's just business as usual.
-
We also paid £800,000 to consultants to assess whether the ferry contract was worth it
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/11/incompetent-grayling-must-quit-over-brexit-ferry-deal-says-labour
-
BJW.
Indeed. And two of the consultants raised issues about Seaborne Freight. And Grayling STILL went ahead with the contract.
By the way, that link at least explains why Eurotunnel wasn't invited to tender for the service.
Ewan West, representing Grayling, told the judge the process was only for “maritime freight” services and, therefore, Eurotunnel “could never have provided that capacity” and “could not have complied” with the terms of the contracts.
Let me take a big deep breath and paraphrase that.
A Lawyer for the Govt, paid for by thee and me, no doubt at several hundred quid an hour, is telling a judge that Eurotunnel wasn't invited to bid for a contract to increase the capacity of freight over the Channel in the event of a No Deal clusterf**k, because Grayling's Department had decided it only wanted to consider routes that went OVER the sea, not under it. And that is the BEST defence they can find?
I know the whole Brexit thing is based on us going back to some mythical time when Britannia ruled the waves and we were remotely aloof from Europe, but I didn't realise we were planning to ignore the fact that the Channel Tunnel was ever built.
-
Grayling is an absoute joke and would be in any colour Government
Pity he will be long gone before his beloved Pacer Trains or Caravans on Rails disappear. He always rolls them out when challenged by anyone on the performance of the Rail system
However having said they would be here "by" 2019 the wording was altered right at the end of December 18 (buried in other news) to "be the end of" which gives them another year !
-
As a matter of perspective, the divorce bill we're paying to the EU is equivalent to the cost of more than THREE Euro tunnels!
-
Aye, and we're inflicting it upon ourselves...
-
Yes BB. But that's a one-off payment, for things that we have already signed up to and will benefit from in the future.
The amount we've already lost in depressed economic performance since the referendum vote, would have paid for for 6 Channel Tunnels. And the projected loss of income if we go for a No Deal Brexit would pay for another another SIXTY on top of that.
All of those things are facts. The question then is, which ones do you put more emphasis on?
-
As a matter of perspective, the divorce bill we're paying to the EU is equivalent to the cost of more than THREE Euro tunnels!
You weren't the guy on the BBC phone in the other day...................
"I think those within the EU who are trying to scupper Brexit, are the ones who stand to gain most from the £39bn divorce bill".
Yes, there are people out there who defy logic!
-
Billy, are those facts or predictions?
-
Billy, you constantly bring up the funding of the UK by the EU.
You know that we are a large net contributor to the EU, an undeniable fact.
Official figures from the EU Commission itself show that out of the 28 member states the UK ranks 24th out of the 28 as a beneficiary of the single market.
And that in a paper published by the CBI it was stated "trade between Eu member states is clearly a zero-sum game and we are really only talking about where the factories are built"? the factories were evidently not built in the UK.
Most agreements/deals are more beneficial to the continental EU states than to the UK.
-
BB. Do yourself a favour. Read what I write before knee-jerking into smart arse mode.
Selby. Have you got the link for that CBI quote? And I don't mean the letter in today's Yorkshire Post from a Tory councillor.
-
BST. What is smart-arse mode about asking you if those figures are really facts like you claim them to be, or predictions?
-
Read what I wrote.
-
BJW.
Indeed. And two of the consultants raised issues about Seaborne Freight. And Grayling STILL went ahead with the contract.
By the way, that link at least explains why Eurotunnel wasn't invited to tender for the service.
Ewan West, representing Grayling, told the judge the process was only for “maritime freight” services and, therefore, Eurotunnel “could never have provided that capacity” and “could not have complied” with the terms of the contracts.
Let me take a big deep breath and paraphrase that.
A Lawyer for the Govt, paid for by thee and me, no doubt at several hundred quid an hour, is telling a judge that Eurotunnel wasn't invited to bid for a contract to increase the capacity of freight over the Channel in the event of a No Deal clusterf**k, because Grayling's Department had decided it only wanted to consider routes that went OVER the sea, not under it. And that is the BEST defence they can find?
I know the whole Brexit thing is based on us going back to some mythical time when Britannia ruled the waves and we were remotely aloof from Europe, but I didn't realise we were planning to ignore the fact that the Channel Tunnel was ever built.
I think it's more likely BST that the proponents of brexit missed the opportunity to include Eurotunnel in any plan because they actually live in a reality well before Eurotunnel was built.
-
Here's the NHS take on Brexit....
Physicians were unable to reach a consensus: Should Brexit take place? The Allergists were in favour of scratching it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.
The Gastroenterologists had a sort of gut feeling about it but the Neurologists thought the Brexiters had a lot of nerve.
Meanwhile, Obstetricians felt certain everyone was labouring under a misconception, while the Opthalmologists considered the idea short sighted.
Pathologists yelled 'Over my dead body!' while the Paediatricians said 'Oh grow up!'
The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the radiologists could see right through it.
Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing and the internists claimed it would indeed be a bitter pill to swallow.
The plastic surgeons opined that May's proposal would " put a whole new face on the matter" The podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.
Anaesthesiologists thought it was all a gas and those lofty Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.
In the end the Proctologists won out leaving the entire decision up to the assholes in Parliament.
I'll leave it up to your imagination as to what the gynaecologists though of the politicians handling this whole mess....
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47218687
Given May's track record, that means it WILL be her deal or a delay then.
She's building quite a track record.
Insisting there wasn't going to be a GE...before calling a GE.
Insisting she wasn't going to delay the meaningful vote...before delaying the meaningful vote.
Insisting she wasn't going to renegotiate the backstop...before renegotiating the backstop.
I've never known a PM more unconcerned about her public reputation for going back on her word. I wonder if she has any idea how the world sees her.
-
In other news. I see Ford has also joined Project Fear today. It's some cabal, trying to deceive us all, int it?
But never mind. A failed politician is here telling us it'll all be ok.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCr4today/status/1094891032951558144
I wonder if there is anyone left in the country who listens to what he says and thinks "Yep! He's got a track record of telling the truth and doing what's best for the country. I'll believe him."
-
I cant believe any MP / Minister any more
They are all duplicitous and give vaguely wrong or vaguely right answers whichever faction they are in but I think that they think :
a) they are convincing and so we believe them
b) after this mess is resolved one way or another they will just carry on without recriminations
Probably with b) they will be right
-
In other news. I see Ford has also joined Project Fear today. It's some cabal, trying to deceive us all, int it?
But never mind. A failed politician is here telling us it'll all be ok.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCr4today/status/1094891032951558144
I wonder if there is anyone left in the country who listens to what he says and thinks "Yep! He's got a track record of telling the truth and doing what's best for the country. I'll believe him."
The last I heard was that Ford was ready to chuck in the towel on selling cars in the whole of Europe in any case.
-
In other news. I see Ford has also joined Project Fear today. It's some cabal, trying to deceive us all, int it?
But never mind. A failed politician is here telling us it'll all be ok.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCr4today/status/1094891032951558144
I wonder if there is anyone left in the country who listens to what he says and thinks "Yep! He's got a track record of telling the truth and doing what's best for the country. I'll believe him."
The last I heard was that Ford was ready to chuck in the towel on selling cars in the whole of Europe in any case.
I'm sure there will be an article on that somewhere then...
-
Meanwhile, the Labour front bench continues to stick it's face out and shout "Free Punch!" because they are utterly incapable of realising what they look like to the world outside the self-contradictory leftist bubble.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47233605
f**k me sideways. How f**king STUPID can you be? That's the Tories' posters designed for the next Election.
-
This is an op ed from today’s NY Times with an article on Brexit. I for one can’t keep up on it or keep everything straight, and you folks are actually living it, but thought you might like this article. Hope the link works...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/opinion/brexit-may-european-union.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fdavid-leonhardt&action=click&contentCollection=undefined®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection
-
In other news. I see Ford has also joined Project Fear today. It's some cabal, trying to deceive us all, int it?
But never mind. A failed politician is here telling us it'll all be ok.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCr4today/status/1094891032951558144
I wonder if there is anyone left in the country who listens to what he says and thinks "Yep! He's got a track record of telling the truth and doing what's best for the country. I'll believe him."
The last I heard was that Ford was ready to chuck in the towel on selling cars in the whole of Europe in any case.
I'm sure there will be an article on that somewhere then...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2018/01/21/how-committed-is-ford-motor-to-its-european-operation/#4399fc8120ea
-
Meanwhile, the Labour front bench continues to stick it's face out and shout "Free Punch!" because they are utterly incapable of realising what they look like to the world outside the self-contradictory leftist bubble.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47233605
f**k me sideways. How f**king STUPID can you be? That's the Tories' posters designed for the next Election.
Theresa May will go down as the most incompetent PM in history, but Corbyn will go down as the most incompetent leader of any opposition if he can't win a general election against her.
-
In other news. I see Ford has also joined Project Fear today. It's some cabal, trying to deceive us all, int it?
But never mind. A failed politician is here telling us it'll all be ok.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCr4today/status/1094891032951558144
I wonder if there is anyone left in the country who listens to what he says and thinks "Yep! He's got a track record of telling the truth and doing what's best for the country. I'll believe him."
The last I heard was that Ford was ready to chuck in the towel on selling cars in the whole of Europe in any case.
I'm sure there will be an article on that somewhere then...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilwinton/2018/01/21/how-committed-is-ford-motor-to-its-european-operation/#4399fc8120ea
So AL. That's an article from over a year ago with a few people last year speculating that Ford might pull out of MAKING cars in Europe and a few other ones speculating that they won't. Is that what you are relying on when you said "The last I heard was that Ford was ready to chuck in the towel on SELLING cars in the whole of Europe in any case."?
Still, I'm sure you're right and this is just another example of this co-ordinated Project Fear approach to con us into staying in the EU when it would clearly be beneficial for us to leave because Rees-Mogg and Johnson and that bloke who sells shit ale have all said so.
-
May loses another vote and Downing Street blame the Labour Party ...err what about the Tory abstainers?
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47245992
-
May loses another vote and Downing Street blame the Labour Party ...err what about the Tory abstainers?
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47245992
TT, not sure why this vote was needed as it only confirms that May has one foot permanently jammed down the bog, the ERG I assume abstained as it demonstrates their hold over and ability to toy with her without damaging themselves.
-
Brexit has cost $80 Billion so far, phew I thought it was going to be bad news!
''Cost of Brexit to UK economy running at £40bn a year – Bank rate-setter''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/14/brexit-has-cost-uk-economy-at-least-80bn-since-vote-bank-of-england-rate-setter
-
Yeah but he's got a foreign name.
Project Fear.
-
''Many people in my community feel used. We were taken as fools by the leave campaign who, once they got what they needed, have deserted us.
But people in my community are not stupid. If I helped bring about Brexit, I will now work twice as hard to secure a people’s vote so that, together, we can help put this right''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/14/brexit-has-cost-uk-economy-at-least-80bn-since-vote-bank-of-england-rate-setter
-
Interesting poll:
37% of people think the country will be better off and 20% think they personally will be better off after Brexit. What do they know that the bloke in sydney's post doesn't?
https://www.orb-international.com/2019/02/05/brexitfeb2019/
-
Interesting poll:
37% of people think the country will be better off and 20% think they personally will be better off after Brexit. What do they know that the bloke in sydney's post doesn't?
https://www.orb-international.com/2019/02/05/brexitfeb2019/
They probably read the Daily Mail Wilts, someone does.
-
''The trip from London to Lincolnshire showed me the Brexit divide’s depth''
An interesting view on the state of things and why there is a stalemate with a possible way forward, a variation of this approach is also being used in the middle east to try to bring Palestinians and Israelis closer together.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/16/trip-london-lincolnshire-brexit-divide
-
What? Build a wall round Boston? I'd be up for that.
-
Now Honda pissing off. Why stay in a country which will be requiring tariffs for trade with Europe, when you could make everything in Japan with no tariffs for European trade?
#ProjectFear
-
Are you sure this has anything to do with brexit I have a few friends there and they say not, that is there word ms maybe just opinion.
-
Are you sure this has anything to do with brexit I have a few friends there and they say not, that is there word ms maybe just opinion.
You have friends at Honda, Nissan, Ford, Panasonic, Sony and Dyson?
-
In other new: Netherlands talking to 250 firms about leaving UK (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/09/brexit-uk-companies-discuss-moving-to-netherlands)
-
No bob just at Honda
-
Japan have just got a trade deal with Europe which allows them tariff free trade. Maybe if a deal with Europe was done or we were staying in it'd allow for greater manufacture for Honda but why would they keep manufacturing and exporting in a country that with our current uncertainty will probably end up paying tariffs to export to Europe?
-
I wonder how many of the people losing their jobs at Honda voted to Leave the EU.
-
Collateral damage Hound.
They've done their job. Served their purpose. They can be dispensed with now.
-
Japan have just got a trade deal with Europe which allows them tariff free trade. Maybe if a deal with Europe was done or we were staying in it'd allow for greater manufacture for Honda but why would they keep manufacturing and exporting in a country that with our current uncertainty will probably end up paying tariffs to export to Europe?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/18/japan-almost-cancelled-brexit-talks-high-handed-letter-liam-fox-jeremy-hunt
From the article....
To add to Britain’s frustration, Japan has reportedly ruled out simply replicating the terms of a Japan-EU trade agreement that went into effect at the start of this month but which will be unavailable to the UK after Brexit. Instead, it will seek tougher concessions from Britain than it secured from the EU.
The lunatics running the asylum are still hard at it! :turd:
-
Of all the promises that the Brexiteers made us that have yet to come true 'Honda backs Brexit Britain' and will continue to make its car here now matter what the outcome - has suddenly shot up the list...
https://www.westmonster.com/honda-to-keep-producing-cars-in-swindon-whatever-the-brexit-outcome/
-
Of all the promises that the Brexiteers made us that have yet to come true 'Honda backs Brexit Britain' and will continue to make its car here now matter what the outcome - has suddenly shot up the list...
https://www.westmonster.com/honda-to-keep-producing-cars-in-swindon-whatever-the-brexit-outcome/
You can't help but love the last line of that!
-
But, as I believe will be clear in their statement, they'd move it Brexit or not.
-
But, as I believe will be clear in their statement, they'd move it Brexit or not.
The statement will name other reasons alongside Brexit, but that's not to say they would have moved regardless by any stretch.
Surely no-one can say all these companies either closing down factories or moving their HQs out of the country within the last 12 months is one big coincidence? That would be absurd.
-
It is easily sorted out, my father and his two friends fought in Burma, not one of them had anything in their house that was Japanese.
He told me at a young age, if I bought a Japanese car he would disown me.
It was never an issue, that was the way it was.
-
It is easily sorted out, my father and his two friends fought in Burma, not one of them had anything in their house that was Japanese.
He told me at a young age, if I bought a Japanese car he would disown me.
It was never an issue, that was the way it was.
So your answer is don't buy anything from any companies that choose to move away from the UK???
-
A better answer is this country trying to innovate and lead the future. Why not take the lead on electric cars, create a new brand and move from there? Isn't that the kind of thing tax breaks and investment should support?
We have the skill set to lead on this kind of stuff and are falling behind in some ways, that's a bigger concern than Brexit....
Honda were going no matter what happened for them it makes perfect sense to.
-
Yes, you don't have to tell the french and germans to do it, they do it anyway, treat them the same.
-
A better answer is this country trying to innovate and lead the future. Why not take the lead on electric cars, create a new brand and move from there? Isn't that the kind of thing tax breaks and investment should support?
We have the skill set to lead on this kind of stuff and are falling behind in some ways, that's a bigger concern than Brexit....
Honda were going no matter what happened for them it makes perfect sense to.
If there was an individual or company interested in doing that, they won't be doing it now I'm afraid, with the future tariffs on exporting cars post-brexit.
-
A better answer is this country trying to innovate and lead the future. Why not take the lead on electric cars, create a new brand and move from there? Isn't that the kind of thing tax breaks and investment should support?
We have the skill set to lead on this kind of stuff and are falling behind in some ways, that's a bigger concern than Brexit....
Honda were going no matter what happened for them it makes perfect sense to.
If there was an individual or company interested in doing that, they won't be doing it now I'm afraid, with the future tariffs on exporting cars post-brexit.
Indeed. One only has to ask where the biggest market is, EU or UK. Anyone wanting to build new technologically advanced cars, (electric), will want to build them where their biggest market is and where trade is simple and smooth.
Tariffs, queues and customs inspections at ports, plus shipping costs rather precludes anyone thinking the UK is a good place for manufacturing business; no matter how much expertise we like to think we have.
But don't worry, the car repair and maintenance business in the UK is set to bloom - if they can get the parts!
-
A better answer is this country trying to innovate and lead the future. Why not take the lead on electric cars, create a new brand and move from there? Isn't that the kind of thing tax breaks and investment should support?
We have the skill set to lead on this kind of stuff and are falling behind in some ways, that's a bigger concern than Brexit....
Honda were going no matter what happened for them it makes perfect sense to.
If there was an individual or company interested in doing that, they won't be doing it now I'm afraid, with the future tariffs on exporting cars post-brexit.
Or they'd set up the factories inside the Single Market, like the Japanese did in the UK..!
-
BFYP
I suggest you read The State We're In by Will Hutton.
25 years old but it's more relevant today than ever.
The problem is the way in which our politics and economics have, for generations, prioritised short-term profit taking over long term investment in capability. That is why German and Japan have high tech manufacturing on a massive scale and we don't.
Have a read of that book. It's eye opening and profoundly depressing.
-
A better answer is this country trying to innovate and lead the future. Why not take the lead on electric cars, create a new brand and move from there? Isn't that the kind of thing tax breaks and investment should support?
We have the skill set to lead on this kind of stuff and are falling behind in some ways, that's a bigger concern than Brexit....
Honda were going no matter what happened for them it makes perfect sense to.
Well that's not what the chief ex of Honda said back in September.
As for developing electric cars - the leading proponent of Brexit in that field has decided to do his bit to promote British industry by moving production of them to Singapore. I wonder what attracted him to the de-regulated tax haven that has no effective workplace rights?
Although I am an opponent of Brexit, sometimes I am afraid you have to hold your hands up and say well done, you were right. The Brexiteer economist Patrick Minford said leaving the EU would mean the end of car manufacture in the UK and it should be left to die like coal and steel. Well there you are. That's what you voted for coming true.
-
It's Jan 15th. The only practical solution now is to postpone article 50.
Get ready for a perpetual state of brexit.
As I was saying.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/24/brexit-could-be-delayed-until-2021-eu-sources-reveal
(https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/24/brexit-could-be-delayed-until-2021-eu-sources-reveal)
If you think about it, we're still very much close to, or on, day zero - the day right after the referendum. Nothing has technically been agreed, or looks like being agreed. So the path of least (economically damaging) resistance is to reenter negotiations that fits around the bureaucracy of the EU.
-
There's a slight air of pathos about the whole thing.
May's one and only strategy in going back to Brussels is to try to convince them that she really is unhinged enough to seriously contemplate No Deal. Meanwhile, this weekend, some of the more grown up of her Cabinet ministers (and f**k me, it shows you're scraping the barrell when Amber Ruud is one of the better ones) have been gently patting her on the head and saying to the world, "She's tired. It's ok. We'll sort it out."
What a f**king embarrassment we are making of ourselves to the rest of the world.
-
You are The Social Incompetent.
You are embarrassing your country on a daily basis. You are unable to function in public without looking awkwarder than a 13 year old lad caught with a nif mag. The President of Italy invites you to play pool. And be videoed.
Do you.
A) Say "f**k off"
B) Say "f**k off"
C) Say, "Aye alright."
https://mobile.twitter.com/GiuseppeConteIT/status/1099787057982001154
-
You are The Social Incompetent.
You are embarrassing your country on a daily basis. You are unable to function in public without looking awkwarder than a 13 year old lad caught with a nif mag. The President of Italy invites you to play pool. And be videoed.
Do you.
A) Say "f**k off"
B) Say "f**k off"
C) Say, "Aye alright."
https://mobile.twitter.com/GiuseppeConteIT/status/1099787057982001154
She’s mastered that cue action better than she’s mastered the brexit negotiations 😂😂😂😂😂
-
Cue (no pun) my favourite British/Italian politician joke.
Gordon Brown and Silvio Berlusconi at a conference go out for a pub lunch.
Attractive barmaid asks them if there's anything they fancy.
Berlusconi looks up from the menu, winks and says "Any chance of a quickie?"
Barmaid slaps his face and walks off.
Gordon Brown leans over and says quietly, "Err... It's pronounced 'quiche' ".
-
:lol:
Cue (no pun) my favourite British/Italian politician joke.
Gordon Brown and Silvio Berlusconi at a conference go out for a pub lunch.
Attractive barmaid asks them if there's anything they fancy.
Berlusconi looks up from the menu, winks and says "Any chance of a quickie?"
Barmaid slaps his face and walks off.
Gordon Brown leans over and says quietly, "Err... It's pronounced 'quiche' ".
:lol:
-
The biggest problem the European's have in front of them is a China and US trade deal.
The easiest way to cut the trade deficit that the US has is by China importing more US made vehicles at the expense of the European manufactures. Add the lead the Us has in electric battery powered vehicles.
The German economy has the largest threat in front of it since the 1930's
-
As , by comparison , American cars are ugly and crap , the German car industry has nothing to fear.
We need to focus on the biggest threat to the UK since the 1930s , whilst the Tories continue to claim that a criminal funded , illegally run , right wing elitist inspired advisory referendum is a mandate to inflict it upon us.
-
Is there any procedure in the UK constitution, where by a mentally unstable PM can be removed from office, something like a UK version of impeachment?
-
None at all I think. It relies on Parliament giving her the push. The Tory party on their own can't do it now until next Jan as their rules only allow one challenge per 12 months.
The old method was the old heads in the party sitting the PM down and telling them they had to leave for the good of the reputation of the party, but we're way past that point now.
Fascinating article by ex-Tory MP Matthew Parris in The Times this weekend. He was strongly suggesting that she is mentally unstable. Said he's spoken to several senior Tories who are at their wits end with her. They say that they have meetings with her discussing problems and she just stares at them then carries on as if nowt had happened. She doesn't answer phone messages or e-mails. Never discussed what she is planning with them. He said some of the people he spoke to were shouting at him that they have no idea how to interact with her. Quite a scary read to be honest.
The article is behind a paywall but this is a flavour.
https://mobile.twitter.com/arusbridger/status/1099331886348947456
-
Billy, should this be in the rumours section?
-
Foxbat, who would you believe, you or the financial times, and the economist publication? 18000 jobs are estimated to be threatened by Brexit alone in the German automotive industry if we crash out. Mercedes are threatened with recalling 774000 cars over Diesel cheating software and the guy who loves a deal is threatening a 5% tariff on cars from the EU and rising over time.
-
Interesting Labour move today though, may push the rebel Tories closer to backing May, may mean the so called peoples vote is getting closer.
-
Interesting Labour move today though, may push the rebel Tories closer to backing May, may mean the so called peoples vote is getting closer.
........and to think that some of our posters said it would never happen.
-
There is a section of the mental health act that specifically deals with MPs who suffer a psychiatric episode in the House.
They are sectioned under this law and taken to a place of safety.
Edit
It was Section 141. Looks like it's been repealed.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/section-141-of-the-mental-health-act-to-be-abolished
-
that's a pity then. listening to May claiming to be able to deliver Brexit ( which the majority of people do not want anyway ) is like listening to somebody lying drunk in the gutter telling you they don't have a drink problem.
-
that's a pity then. listening to May claiming to be able to deliver Brexit ( which the majority of people do not want anyway ) is like listening to somebody lying drunk in the gutter telling you they don't have a drink problem.
Mate, you are due a barrage of posts for putting that bit in the brackets.
-
Interesting Labour move today though, may push the rebel Tories closer to backing May, may mean the so called peoples vote is getting closer.
Yes I reckon you're right - on both of those things.
Going by previous votes there will be around 30 Labour Leave MP's who wont support a 2nd referendum and may also now back May's deal. So will there be enough Tory remainers & hardline ERG's to vote against it and balance them out?
As I said before. If we do leave the EU under May's deal - it will be Caroline Flint that takes us out.
-
All going a bit bat-shit.
Another 3 Cabinet ministers telling May to return to the world of sanity and chuck out No Deal or they are resigning.
This is utterly unprecedented stuff. I'm pretty well clued up on politics, but I can't think of any time in the last 100 years that so many Cabinet ministers have openly defied a PM. This after a record number of Cabinet resignations over the past 18 months.
Our system of government is collapsing around our ears.
Anyone remember Strong & Stable?
I really am thinking now that May must be mentally unwell. No PM in modern history has ever dealt with this scale of relentless rebellion without being sacked or resigning. How on earth does she summon up the will to get out of bed every morning and face the world after such a string of humiliations? She must be stretched to breaking point.
-
I remember "strong and stable government" - say it long enough and oops it still did not happen and shows no sign of coming soon
I remember " must deliver on the will of the British people" and "we will be leaving the EU on the 29th Match" and now the new "we have it within our grasp to leave with a deal on the 29th March"
I think a great anaolgy above comparing HER to a drunk lying in the gutter saying they dont have a drink problem. What IS wrong with that woman ?
.... and how can she be so thick skinned - still even now saying I will get legally binding changes to the backstop (because the EU always make last minute concessions).
I voted Remain and have never hidden that but I would (like Kevin Keegan) Love it - just love it if she does not eVer get us out of the EU and then justifiably looks the most stupid Politician ever
If that does not happen I will look the most stupid poster ever on here and this will be the stupidest Post made by the stupidest person !!!
-
I remember "strong and stable government" - say it long enough and oops it still did not happen and shows no sign of coming soon
I remember " must deliver on the will of the British people" and "we will be leaving the EU on the 29th Match" and now the new "we have it within our grasp to leave with a deal on the 29th March"
I think a great anaolgy above comparing HER to a drunk lying in the gutter saying they dont have a drink problem. What IS wrong with that woman ?
.... and how can she be so thick skinned - still even now saying I will get legally binding changes to the backstop (because the EU always make last minute concessions).
I voted Remain and have never hidden that but I would (like Kevin Keegan) Love it - just love it if she does not eVer get us out of the EU and then justifiably looks the most stupid Politician ever
If that does not happen I will look the most stupid poster ever on here and this will be the stupidest Post made by the stupidest person !!!
I think you are far away from that accolade Wolfie.
Plenty are before you for that award.
-
May is just a poor leader, she works hard but she cannot get a strategy and work with it, really poor leadership.
As for a 2nd ref proposal, it's been debated to death really, the key thing is what do you put on the ballot? Should it be a direct choice, multiple choices?
-
This pretty much sums up how the rest of the world sees our self-indulgent emotional spasm.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1099798580813094913
Still. We took back control, eh?
-
Interesting Labour move today though, may push the rebel Tories closer to backing May, may mean the so called peoples vote is getting closer.
Although Labour's position comes with caveats, it is the first solid hint that Corbyn will back a second referendum. I think it is quite helpful to May actually. She can now hold up the possibility of a second referendum and a long delay to Brexit at the ERG and the DUP. Maybe they will realise that May's Deal represents the hardest version of Brexit they are going to get.
-
May is just a poor leader, she works hard but she cannot get a strategy and work with it, really poor leadership.
As for a 2nd ref proposal, it's been debated to death really, the key thing is what do you put on the ballot? Should it be a direct choice, multiple choices?
As with the rest of the last 2 years mess I guess it would not be easy - but we would have to extend or revoke Article 50 I would suspect for a start then probably multiple choice :
a) leave with Mrs Mays agreement exactly as it is (its taken this far and at least it has some concrete proposals and could be "costed out" by experts
b) leave with No Deal *
c) Remain
* I think the b) option looks a little "tame" because it has no substance and could be worked on by MPs to produce a concensus from the various existing options - Norway, Norway +, Canada etc etc but the problem is that THEY may then take a further 2 years to get to that point
.... but as I have said many times I am no expert just someone probably like many on here and in the UK at large is sick to the back teeth front teeth and any other teeth of the whole bloody mess !
-
Well labour have said b is not an option to be on it, if it is about being democratic (it's not) then put it on there.....
-
We'll see what May actually says soon, but this looks like the compromise to stop ministers resigning.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1100370705366114310?p=v
It's obvious No Deal won't get a majority, so the ball is now in the court of the Tory (and Labour) Brexiteers. Do they now accept that May's Deal is the best Brexit they'll get?
-
Yes it's a sensible move for her really and a move to an end game, whether it becomes that is the question.
-
Sums up the position rather nicely.
https://mobile.twitter.com/afneil/status/1100383784103366658?p=v
-
TRB
If only it were about Brexit for the ERG. But it's not. It's about the future of the Tory party.
-
Yes it's a sensible move for her really and a move to an end game, whether it becomes that is the question.
End game! In what sense?
Her game has failed, and we're slowly realising we have to start a new game (i.e. re-enter into negotiations with the EU on substantially different terms). This is the beginning, not the end.
-
I'm glad some of you don't negotiate on behalf of my business..No deal was a bargaining chip even if we were never going to use it..This constant howling about taking it off the table weakened this country's position because the EU negotiaters knew it couldn't go through...
This May bashing is all well and good and very easy for you all,but it's your beloved Labour party's weak positioning for its own political gain,edgeing it's bets one way or another depending on how the wind blows that is just as much to blame...Not that the British public has bought it..
-
No deal is a contradiction in terms, its a red herring. How can you have 'no deals' with a continent we're so intimately entangled with in every aspect of our lives?! No one with a serious inclination of anything to with anything countenanced that as being possible, so to say its a bargaining chip is an insult really to the intelligence.
It was HER red lines that framed the failure of her negotiations, and now she's adding to that misstep by creating unnecessary uncertainty in the country (and in the EU for people like me) by extending this failure because she is dogmatically stuck to saving face. These things she did herself, and only her herself.
-
TRB
If only it were about Brexit for the ERG. But it's not. It's about the future of the Tory party.
The Brexiteers who put questions to the PM just now showed they haven't moved. Neither has the DUP. So unless the Backstop is removed, which I agree the EU won't countenance, May's Deal won't pass.
I'm guessing No Deal will be defeated even more heavily, especially if the Government allows a free vote, so the question is what will happen if the A50 extension motion also goes down? There's hardly going to be time for a full renegotiation, is there?
-
You would think the extension vote would just be a formality in that circumstance. You're hardly going to get a majority voting against no deal, then a shift to vote down an extension. Even with our bat shit lot.
-
You would think the extension vote would just be a formality in that circumstance. You're hardly going to get a majority voting against no deal, then a shift to vote down an extension. Even with our bat shit lot.
You would, but perhaps not with this dysfunctional HoC.
Of course an extension would only put back the cliff edge unless a new plan emerged.
The only thing I think that could break the log-jam is something which requires a huge leap of faith by the EU and the Irish Government. That's to put something like a 6-7 year time limits on the backstop and pray that we get a comprehensive free trade deal agreed between the UK and EU by then. I can fully understand though that the current shenanigans in Parliament would make them unwilling to make that leap.
-
WingCo.
No Deal was NEVER a bargaining chip because it was never remotely plausible.
You don't bargain by saying, give me what I want or I'll blow my head off and you'll maybe get a few bruises.
EVERYONE who looks at this in any detail knows that No Deal would be an unmitigated catastrophe for us. Yes it would hurt the EU too, but it was never plausible that we would actually go through with a plan that would knock getting on for 10% of GDP.
May even suggesting that No Deal was a serious plan is, frankly, insulting to all concerned. Finally, she's been forced to accept that and now maybe we can start dealing with this like f**king grown ups.
-
I'm in full agreement with you on the fact that no deal would be a absolute disaster..But it would be for the EU too..
I'm just a little tired of seeing everybody hammer May as if she's the only part of the problem.Nobody seems to be questioning anybody else performance in this whole sorry episode..IMO Labour and everybody else have taken the position of whats best for there own party's and there personal preferences and not whats the best deal for the UK that is acceptable,and they are every bit as much to blame as she is...
While she was working 20 hour days trying to renegotiate with the EU as instructed by Parliament,Corbyn is down the allotment turning his spuds..Very bloody rarely as he stood up and given clear and concise opinions on the way forward other than his red lines that the Eu wouldn't entertain which of course he knew in the first place...
As far as I'm concerned whether I agreed with it or not,the people of this country in a set democratic process instructed this parliament to leave the EU..Another referendum again wouldn't be fought on the facts but the relicense that people are that fed up to back teeth of the pathetic squabblings of all mp's that they will just vote remain to have done with it..There is no party that has come out of the last 2 years with any credit whatsoever...
-
Aye, blame the Opposition for the Government's shambles. Anybody would think that Corbyn should have shoved May out of the way and demanded to get the job done himself.
-
I'm glad some of you don't negotiate on behalf of my business..No deal was a bargaining chip even if we were never going to use it..This constant howling about taking it off the table weakened this country's position because the EU negotiaters knew it couldn't go through...
This May bashing is all well and good and very easy for you all,but it's your beloved Labour party's weak positioning for its own political gain,edgeing it's bets one way or another depending on how the wind blows that is just as much to blame...Not that the British public has bought it..
As someone who has negotiated a number of very large contracts I'm rather glad I don't negotiate on behalf of your business if you take that view on how to conduct negotiations.
One of the first rules of negotiating is that you NEVER, EVER, introduce a bargaining chip, (threat), that you are not prepared to use. Because if you are called out on that chip you are going to look pretty bloody stupid whichever call you then make!
Which is one of the reasons May is looking pretty bloody stupid right now.
-
And if there is to be another vote then leavers would be well advise to take a look at this
https://comparethebrexit.com/view-all/
Its even colour coded to make it easier for them to understand.
-
I'm in full agreement with you on the fact that no deal would be a absolute disaster..But it would be for the EU too..
I'm just a little tired of seeing everybody hammer May as if she's the only part of the problem.Nobody seems to be questioning anybody else performance in this whole sorry episode..IMO Labour and everybody else have taken the position of whats best for there own party's and there personal preferences and not whats the best deal for the UK that is acceptable,and they are every bit as much to blame as she is...
While she was working 20 hour days trying to renegotiate with the EU as instructed by Parliament,Corbyn is down the allotment turning his spuds..Very bloody rarely as he stood up and given clear and concise opinions on the way forward other than his red lines that the Eu wouldn't entertain which of course he knew in the first place...
As far as I'm concerned whether I agreed with it or not,the people of this country in a set democratic process instructed this parliament to leave the EU..Another referendum again wouldn't be fought on the facts but the relicense that people are that fed up to back teeth of the pathetic squabblings of all mp's that they will just vote remain to have done with it..There is no party that has come out of the last 2 years with any credit whatsoever...
If that isn't the biggest pile of steaming crap I have ever seen written... Holy mother of Christ!!! What exactly has May been doing for the last two and a half years other than what (she thinks) is best for her party instead of what is best for the country??? Give me Strength!!!!!!!
-
Wing Co.
Your post perfectly describes the problem.
The referendum in 2016 absolutely and categorically did NOT give Parliament a clear instruction. That's why we're in this shit storm now.
What it did was to say that the decision was "Leave" but Leave is not a thing. It's a vast spectrum of potential things. That's the whole point! It could be anything from staying in the SM and CU to a No Deal crash out, with literally dozens of possibilities in between. And in 2016 (and still now), NO-ONE knew what Leave the country had voted for. because it was never discussed.
You say we should have sympathy for May? No. SHE was the one who unilaterally decided that Leave should be interpreted as a very hard leave, leaving the CU and SM. There was no discussion about that. No attempt to build a cross-party consensus. No attempt even to build a consensus within her own party.
May has brought the calamity on her own head. She is an unmitigated disaster of a politician, listening to no-one, consulting with no-one and totally incapable of steering us through the mess that she didn't start, but did make infinitely worse. She has negotiated mendaciously, agreed issues with the EU then coming back to Parliament and stated the inverse. and when everything caved in in January, she then threw her lot in with the ERG and allowed them to tell her what to do, despite them representing a tiny fraction of the country.
She is a narrow-minded, tiny intellect when we needed a grand visionary. She can rot in Hell when she finally goes.
-
She can rot in Hell when she finally goes.
Good luck to Satan in getting her to agree to a date to go to Hell. And then getting her to stick to it.
-
I find it astonishing that someone not in power and not involved with the negotiations can be blamed while we all should feel sorry for the person in power and very much involved in the negotiations. The mind truely boggles
-
Here's one example of why the 2016 vote didn't give a clear direction to Parliament.
In 2016, we were assured by (read "lied to") prominent Leavers that Ireland would not be an issue.
In fact, the reason that May's deal was rejected by dozens of Tory MPs is precisely because of a problem with the Irish border. It turns out that we either break the Good Friday agreement or we have a Brexit that is unpalatable to the Right of the Tory party.
That wasn't discussed at all in 2016, apart from by a handful of Remainers who were accused of being Project Fear mongers.
We know so much more now about what Brexit means. Why on earth not go back to the people and ask what they want in the light of this clarity.
-
I find it astonishing that someone not in power and not involved with the negotiations can be blamed while we all should feel sorry for the person in power and very much involved in the negotiations. The mind truely boggles
Yes Filo it does...but everybody has had there part to play and they haven't done that..They haven't helped one bit...Labour have contributed zip,nothing...And that's why the nation doesn't trust them to govern..
-
Japan have just got a trade deal with Europe which allows them tariff free trade. Maybe if a deal with Europe was done or we were staying in it'd allow for greater manufacture for Honda but why would they keep manufacturing and exporting in a country that with our current uncertainty will probably end up paying tariffs to export to Europe?
i heard one of these university experts talking about this HONDA closures at 3 am in the morning on the radio recently he said the japanese honda plant was working undercapacity and mentioned about the Turkish plant also closing
https://www.autonews.com/automakers-suppliers/honda-will-close-uk-turkey-plants-restructuring-move
remember the bit about electric cars now
the expert did mention how polite The Japanese people were -meaning if you asked for directions to somewhere and they didn't know they would literally make it up !!! sending you to wrong direction ! just to be polite --- strange people -- he said not wanting to upset you
he meant to say they would say what they said anyhow in the official statement
-
I find it astonishing that someone not in power and not involved with the negotiations can be blamed while we all should feel sorry for the person in power and very much involved in the negotiations. The mind truely boggles
Yes Filo it does...but everybody has had there part to play and they haven't done that..They haven't helped one bit...Labour have contributed zip,nothing...And that's why the nation doesn't trust them to govern..
You appear to have missed the alternative to May's ridiculous deal that Labour have been proposing for as long as I can remember.
-
Glyn do you think labours alternative will get through?
-
When you simply have to read again to realise its not satire https://twitter.com/RemainiacsCast/status/1100341476335202304?s=19
-
Bpool.
No. Of course it won't. Because their tribal politics going on. No Tory is going to let Corbyn be seen as the man who cut through the problem.
As I say. There's no majority in Parliament for anything. Only majorities against things. Which is why there's no option but Ref2.
-
Bpool.
No. Of course it won't. Because their tribal politics going on. No Tory is going to let Corbyn be seen as the man who cut through the problem.
As I say. There's no majority in Parliament for anything. Only majorities against things. Which is why there's no option but Ref2.
And even that solves nothing does it? Would it yield a clear result, what goes on the ballot etc? Nightmare scenario.
There's probably just slightly more chance of May winning her deal through, but the EU hold the cards on that.
-
Glyn do you think labours alternative will get through?
Even though it does away with the Irish backstop that's stopped May's Deal being ratified and therefore has oodles more chance of being approved by Parliament, it won't get through because
(a) This government won't allow it to be discussed with the EU
(b) This government won't allow it to be put in front of Parliament, and
(c) despite what wing commander thinks about what anyone not in the government can contribute to the process, because of (a) and (b), there's bugger all anyone can do about it.
-
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781768/Implications_for_Business_and_Trade_of_a_No_Deal_Exit_on_29_March_2019.pdf
-
Precisely Glyn.
And Parliament is the Sovereign body in the UK, because if the Govt brings really bad legislation, they can reject it. But they can only suggest alternative legislation to the Govt. If the Govt won't take it, you're stuck.
That's where we are right now.
-
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781768/Implications_for_Business_and_Trade_of_a_No_Deal_Exit_on_29_March_2019.pdf
Paragraph 21.
In layman's terms "We can't be certain exactly what the effect of No Deal would be, but the best predictions suggest it would only be something that a criminally insane mind would even contemplate. Best estimates are that we'd lose over £1trn of economic output over the next 15 years, even if we smoothly moved onto WTO rules. And we're not remotely close to smoothly moving, so there would be significant immediate economic losses on top."
If you're sensibly wanting to discuss this, you might want to stop and consider the motivation of anyone who is seriously suggesting that No Deal is a good way forward from here.
As a British citizen who cares about the future well being of my kids and my country, I'm beyond livid that this is even being discussed.
-
Re Ref2
YouGov Poll - Were Labour right to support a new referendum?
All voters
Right - 37%
Wrong 42%
Labour voters
Right - 53%
Wrong - 23%
https://twitter.com/britainelects
-
https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-michael-gove-ministers-to-hold-emergency-meeting-over-no-deal-chaos-2019-2?r=US&IR=T
Pallets. We can't even get pallets right.
-
Makes you wonder why the Norwegian investment group are investing billions in the UK Billy doesn't it. especially when they have a 30 year investment strategy.
After all they are only the largest investment fund in the world, they must employ idiots.
-
Selby.
Yes . We're a highly developed country. Our economy will still grow long term even after Brexit. Just not as well as it would do otherwise.
-
Those who are hoping for a short extension of the Article 50 process - the one thing that will probably be voted for in two weeks time - might be disappointed. That odious individual Macron has hinted he might veto Britain's request.
Remember it isn't enough for the EU Commission to agree to an extension request, all the other 27 members have to agree.
-
Makes you wonder why the Norwegian investment group are investing billions in the UK Billy doesn't it. especially when they have a 30 year investment strategy.
After all they are only the largest investment fund in the world, they must employ idiots.
Probably because they are investing while it is cheap to do so in the hope that in 30 years time we've got our shit together.
-
Those who are hoping for a short extension of the Article 50 process - the one thing that will probably be voted for in two weeks time - might be disappointed. That odious individual Macron has hinted he might veto Britain's request.
Remember it isn't enough for the EU Commission to agree to an extension request, all the other 27 members have to agree.
Funnily enough, other countries have self-interests too. Who'd have thought it?
-
Of course. But you have to remember that Macron is currently brutalizing his own people. I'm no lover of Juncker, Tusk and Merkel but at least they are trying to find the best solution.
-
Of course. But you have to remember that Macron is currently brutalizing his own people. I'm no lover of Juncker, Tusk and Merkel but at least they are trying to find the best solution.
His point is understandable though. We've got no where in 2 years, so why extend? It's doubtful there will be an agreement and were just delaying the inevitable.
-
The French never wanted us way back when the European concept began
-
And after everything we've done for them ! 😉
-
Filo
Wrong,wrong, wrong
We were offered a place in the European Coal and Steel Community (the forerunner to the EEC). We first of all ignored it, then when pressed, turned it down in the most shambolicly of circumstances. A civil servant rushed round London trying to find a minister in the Labour Govt to make a late night decision on whether we were going in. He found Herbert Morrison having dinner. Morrison asked him to describe what the ECSC was about. When the civil servant told him it was about jointly managing the industries across countries to stop competition getting out of hand in a damaging way, Morrison replied "No, no, no. The Durham miners won't wear it."
We could have then joined the negotiations to firm the original EEC, but WE chose not to do.
Once the EEC was set up, we DID try to join but were turned down by Charles dear Gaulle, true. But there was nothing to blame but our air of superiority for not being in the group and influencing, even leading it, right from the start.
-
At last, definitive proof that Racism and Immigration had absolutely nothing to do with Brexit at all....
(https://i.imgur.com/MYv1yFA.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/g5bLcRL.jpg)
Next thing you know people will be saying we're going to relax our food hygiene standards and allow chlorinated chicken and steroid filled beef!
-
If the press this morning is anything to go on, May could well get her deal...
-
Well, well, well. I missed this little gem three years back.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017.amp
-
I didn't think that anybody that listened to him all through the campaign didn't remember him saying that the fight would go on.
-
Previous message deleted. I didn't read yours properly Idler.
I heard him regularly say that he wouldn't accept a narrow Remain win. I'd just not picked up on the delicious irony of him saying that 52-48 wouldn't be successful.
Funny, int it, that NOW, 52-48 is the utterly decisive Will of the People, questioned only by the Enemies of the People who would threaten the very foundations of democracy if they so much as thought about Ref 2.
What an utterly disgusting, lying, hypocritical Kitson that man is.
-
Exactly BST.
There doesn't seem to be any honesty whatever. No shame anywhere either.
-
''£1.6bn 'bribe' for poorer towns as May seeks Labour's backing for Brexit deal''
Forget all the money we've screwed out of you via Austerity and lost via maladministration, 180 billion through the brexit debacle, here have some fairy dust and we'll all live happily ever after. As long as I can buy your vote.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/03/16bn-for-left-behind-towns-as-may-woos-labour-mps-to-back-br
-
I was just about to post the same thing Sydney.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47435565
This is a f**king joke, right?
"More than half" of £1.6bn will go to towns in the North and Midlands.
Well whoopy f**king doo.
South Yorkshire ALONE was about to get £3bn of funding from the EU if we'd stayed in, because our economy has collapsed under these bas**rds.
And the bribe being offered to the North and Midlands is less than half the amount stuffed down the throats of the DUP to keep them onside with the Tories.
I don't know which is the most embarrassing here. The fact that these Kitsons have no shame in trying to bribe a handful of Labour Leave MPs to vote for May's deal?
Or the fact that they are trying to do it with an amount that would barely cover replacing all the litter bins in the North and Midlands?
Anyone who falls for this deserves everything they've got coming to them when Brexit hits.
-
£197m for Yorkshire and the Humber.
That works out at about 30 quid each.
About 1.5% of what's been spent on Crossrail for London over the past decade.
About 0.00001% of the wealth this country makes every year.
That's what May reckons she needs to bung you to keep supporting her.
That's what this bunch of f**kers think you are worth.
That's the amount they reckon they need to spend to buy your MPs' votes to secure May's deal.
A couple of big rounds and you've been bought, haven't you? That's what they are saying. That's what they think of you.
Like I say, if you don't see through this, then, frankly, you deserve of everything that's coming.
If you don't feel humiliated, used and cheated with every bone and nerve in your body, then you deserve to be used by these bas**rds.
Don't say you weren't warned.
-
Is there no depths which she wont plumb ?
Personally I do hope (even if we do eventually Leave) that however we do it seems to owe nothing at all to Theresa "catchline" May - though I daresay she will be able to say something like ....
.... well I DID deliveron on the will of the British people - and made sure we left in a timeframe almost what we had aimed for - and most of the final Agreement had its DNA in my original Chequers deal
I can hear it now - trolled out in memoirs and talk shows and during talks of her "legacy". Please god DONT let it happen !
-
Always makes me laugh people in our area literally voted to make themselves poorer. Were one of the areas that benefit the most regularly, which is multiple times this one off payment from Theresa but people here are still vehemently pro-Brexit.
-
Well, well, well. I missed this little gem three years back.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017.amp
How could you have missed that? I've posted links to or at least referenced this on every Brexit thread so far, I'd say a few times as well. :laugh:
-
What May is offering to the whole of Y&H is 1/3rd of what the EU was about to plough into South Yorkshire alone, every year for the next 7 years.
Still. We took back control, eh?
-
RedJ
What I'd missed was his specific comment on a 52-48 result.
-
Aye, that's the reason I kept bringing it up when people go on about accepting the result.
-
Apologies for missing that RedJ
-
What May is offering to the whole of Y&H is 1/3rd of what the EU was about to plough into South Yorkshire alone, every year for the next 7 years.
Still. We took back control, eh?
The question is, is this it or is there more to come? That's a defining question that can be spun by any party.....
-
Well BFYP, there's been sod all invested in SY by this Govt for the past 9 years. You reckon they are going to find 70 times the amount they announced last night? Cos that's what it would take to match what we were about to get in EU structural funds.
-
What May is offering to the whole of Y&H is 1/3rd of what the EU was about to plough into South Yorkshire alone, every year for the next 7 years.
Still. We took back control, eh?
The question is, is this it or is there more to come? That's a defining question that can be spun by any party.....
The bigger question is can anybody trust a word of any of her promises in the slightest going on her current record?
-
Latest Poll of Labour voters in Yorkshire says that 82% of them as against 18% would vote Remain in a second Referendum if they get the chance
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/politics/labour-voters-across-yorkshire-overwhelmingly-back-corbyn-on-supporting-a-people-s-vote-1-9628464?fbclid=IwAR0Yokjc3cQ_EWdJNdvfPJO90X-z69dqlI4pyMgvAatzX8XqsG9u2edHiXQ (https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/politics/labour-voters-across-yorkshire-overwhelmingly-back-corbyn-on-supporting-a-people-s-vote-1-9628464?fbclid=IwAR0Yokjc3cQ_EWdJNdvfPJO90X-z69dqlI4pyMgvAatzX8XqsG9u2edHiXQ)
Theresa May will stick to her line I suppose and say whenever I knock on peoples doors they just say one thing (NO not that) - please just get on with it. I have seen no great evidence of people actually even talking about a second vote
* Never mind "Flinty" will still be in the 18%. Donny probably wont get any of the Bribe money either as she is already on the Leave side so doesnt need inducements to Vote for Mobots deal
-
It would be interesting to see what the same results would be across all voters. Polling one party is meaningless.
BST I somewhat agree with you. Funding for this area could be better. But when it does come it is often focussed on the wrong things.
-
Mrs Wolfie has it covered. According to her we should have a Vote to see if we want a Second vote !
-
That's a valid point BFYP.
It is however totally irelevant when put up against Billy's earlier point that if you are not going to get the money in the first place - then it's pointless worrying about if it's being spent in the right way or not.
May has promised £1.7 billion spread over 7 years for the whole of the north.
The EU would have spent E13 billion in the same period
https://cpmr.org/cohesion/cpmr-analysis-uk-to-lose-e13bn-regional-funding-post-brexit/20525/
That's not spin. It's fact.
-
BFYP
I agree. But that's secondary. The important thing is spending.
Basic economics shows that in a depressed economy, spending Govt money is THE way to kick start things. It sounds stupid but it doesn't actually matter what you spend it on. The key is to get people working, get money in their pockets and get them spending. The effect of that is to lift the entire economy.
Of course it's even better if you spend that on infrastructure or education that lays the foundation for future prosperity.
There is absolutely no excuse for not spending on HS3 for example. Or electrifying the route from Leeds to Sheffield and the Midlands. Or a link from ECML to Donny airport. It's utterly, boneheadedly stupid that the Govt isn't investing in that.
-
Bang on Wilts. The £197m for the whole of Y&H over 7 years is, frankly, insulting. Less that a fiver per person per year.
-
BFYP
I agree. But that's secondary. The important thing is spending.
Basic economics shows that in a depressed economy, spending Govt money is THE way to kick start things. It sounds stupid but it doesn't actually matter what you spend it on. The key is to get people working, get money in their pockets and get them spending. The effect of that is to lift the entire economy.
Of course it's even better if you spend that on infrastructure or education that lays the foundation for future prosperity.
There is absolutely no excuse for not spending on HS3 for example. Or electrifying the route from Leeds to Sheffield and the Midlands. Or a link from ECML to Donny airport. It's utterly, boneheadedly stupid that the Govt isn't investing in that.
I don't agree that leaving the EU and the spending reduction have to be linked though, it is government choice that is rightly criticised and should become a much bigger election issue next time round.
As for the second point, scrap HS2 at least past Birmingham, upgrade the Midland line and build HS3 or at least something better trans-pennine.
-
BFYP
So you think that after we've left the EU, taken a significant and long term hit to the economy, and become much poorer than we other wise would have been, a Govt that has shown zero interest in investing in the North will invest in the North?
-
BFYP
So you think that after we've left the EU, taken a significant and long term hit to the economy, and become much poorer than we other wise would have been, a Govt that has shown zero interest in investing in the North will invest in the North?
No I do not, but they should do this is my point...
-
BFYP
So you think that after we've left the EU, taken a significant and long term hit to the economy, and become much poorer than we other wise would have been, a Govt that has shown zero interest in investing in the North will invest in the North?
No I do not, but they should do this is my point...
Ah, well that settles it...
-
BFYP
They never will, because they do not understand textbook undergraduate economics.
The Tory party has allowed a particular strain of ideology to trump one of the most fundamental, and well-established concepts in economics. They are obsessed with the idea of shrinking the role of the State. They have been for half a century or so, since the extreme free market nutters at the Institute of Economic Affairs (funded by...well, who knows..they refuse to publish the information) took control of Tory party economic ideology.
The Tory party now, as a matter of principle, refuses to countenance the possibility that the State has a beneficial role to play in the economic well-being of the country. That was the principle behind the utter madness of Austerity in the depths of the worst slump since the 1930s.
That is why we've had the worst recovery from recession for 200 years.
That is why there is so much frustration that t**ts like Farage were able to capitalise on.
That is why we've had the self-harm of Brexit.
There's not a chance in a million that the Tory party as currently constituted will come back to sense and realise what Government could and should be doing to develop our country. It's deeply ironic. Labour has a Marxist Chancellor who understands how the capitalist economy works, far better than the people who are supposed to be the party of capitalism.
-
Phew! The political collossus that is Chris Grayling fights back.
Forget the shambolic handling of the Brexit cross-channel freight issue, or the probation system disaster that he over saw. Now he's going to single-handedly take on and conquer the biggest threat to civilisation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47456004
-
This one smells fishier than Grimsby in a heatwave.
https://twitter.com/DeidreBrock/status/1103287091813863425
-
Just to confirm that Brexit has sent everything completely mad in British politics, it's being reported in the press that the committed markist and anti-capitalist danger to British society, Jeremy Corbyn has had constructive talks with the bloke who came up with many of the right wing policies he despises, Oliver Letwin, advisor to Thatcher, architect of the poll tax and advocate of NHS privatisation among other causes.
I am now going to check again that those reports are true and we haven't yet landed on 1st April....
-
It's not April 1st Wilts. That's after March 29th. We'll be eating the Internet then cos there'll be nowt in the shops.
-
Phew! The political collossus that is Chris Grayling fights back.
Forget the shambolic handling of the Brexit cross-channel freight issue, or the probation system disaster that he over saw. Now he's going to single-handedly take on and conquer the biggest threat to civilisation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47456004
While he has to defend the fact then the longer trains due to assist in alleviating "overcrowding" on Leeds to Mcr as part of the Northern Powerhouse wont now be introduced till 2021
The Trains will be ready (they will have to be as the Pacers surely will have fallen apart) but they cant be used because Leeds Platform lengthening project is (fanfare) duh duh duh derrrrrrrrrrrrr is nowhere near ready and wont be done for then
-
This one smells fishier than Grimsby in a heatwave.
https://twitter.com/DeidreBrock/status/1103287091813863425
Indeed. Saw that live yesterday. Deidre was clearly adamant that the Minister for the Constitution had NOT written to her and thus intimated that either TM was lying or that she'd been lied to. Whichever, a sad reflection on our current government and the sorry mess that Brexit has turned out to be.
-
Line I heard was that she HAD had a reply, but it was all boilerplate evasion and didn't address the specific questions.
Which are, to remind folk, that a company which has regularly boasted of being able to (illegally) harvest social media data to (illegally) send micro-targetted lies to people judged to be susceptible in order to (illegally) affect election results and which was (illegally) paid to do all that in the Brexit campaign by the Leave side has been invited into Downing Street for discussions. And the PM refuses point blank to explain why. Even though she is duty bound to explain to Parliament why her officials meet with external visitors.
This stinks to high heaven.
-
And we're just over three weeks away from the exit date and we still haven't got a f**king clue what's going on.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/xZrrRSB.jpg)
-
A theory about the meaningful votes next week that is doing the rounds.
On Tuesday May's Deal is rejected again, though not as heavily as last time. On Wednesday No Deal is overwhelmingly rejected - only the ERG and a few mavericks will vote in favour. On Thursday the Government allows a free vote on the extension to Article 50 and it passes.
May then goes cap in hand to Brussels and the EU "reluctantly" agrees to an extension of four weeks. In early April there is another Meaningful Vote on May's Deal but May spells it out - either vote for it or it is Leave with No Deal as the EU won't extend further.
Sounds plausible to me. The only thing that could change that scenario is if a large majority of MPs swung behind a Second Referendum and an extension of up to two years. But I can't see that happening. Supporters of the Second Referendum in the HoC are vocal enough, but when you count them up, there's not that many.
-
... And if May should pull that off, because if she manages to make her deal and No Deal the only possible outcomes, her's will pass, she will soon announce she is standing down once the Tories have chosen her successor.
-
Interesting theory TRB but I reckon you have forgotten one major point.
If May is defeated next week the following day she will hold a vote on whether or not to take No Deal off the table. Which way will she vote in that deal - and will she retain any credibility with anybody after it?
https://www.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2292501507741248/
-
May will probably have to vote for No Deal, because she says she wants it as a bargaining chip. However I can't see that she can impose a three line whip because she will lose half her Cabinet.
-
Very good piece by Peston, Wilts.
I must admit, I'd not thought of that scenario.
As he says, if she votes against No Deal after three years of saying it's viable, that would be the biggest political U-turn in history.
If she votes for No Deal and Parliament doesn't, she is in an impossible situation of being expected to run a policy that is totally against her beliefs.
Either way, that's copper-bottomed resignation stuff in normal times.
Course, there is a way she could be true to her beliefs AND win. If she votes for No Deal and Parliament also voted for No Deal.
But let's not think about that, eh? We've all got to be able to sleep at night for the next week...
-
If she votes for No Deal and Parliament doesn't, she is in an impossible situation of being expected to run a policy that is totally against her beliefs.
She has been doing that though for the last 3 years surely ? As a Remain voter (I am sure she was) she just developed an EVEN thicker skin to "attempt" to convince the people she was in fact the biggest supporter of Leave that there was
She would swap horses and deliver herself devoutly to that new cause and no doubt get a new catchy catchphrase / mantra to go along with it
She is not in isolation either though in batting for the other side whether Blue or Red
-
If by some chance May were to get the HoC to vote for No Deal she'd have to find half a cabinet from somewhere. But the more you look at the arithmetic, No Deal has less chance of winning the vote than May's Deal.
There is another possibility which doesn't align with my scenario and I think is highly possible. That's when the vote on requesting an extension is held. I think it is very possible that could be defeated as well.
It sums up the justified frustration of the EU negotiators. Parliament is very good at saying what it doesn't want, but not what it does want.
-
TRB
If the first two votes turn down May's deal and No Deal, there's no way that Parliament wouldn't vote for an extension of A50. Because to vote against that in those circumstances is implicitly voting for No Deal.
-
Meanwhile our glorious PM battles on. Today she's imploring the EU to change policy on the backstop.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47487320
When I saw the headline, I assumed she was in Brussels, doing this imploring. Sat in serious meetings trying to thrash out a compromise that both sides could accept.
But, bizarrely, she's imploring the EU from...Grimsby.
Almost as if she's achieved f**k all in Brussels, so she's given up on that asked one of her pre-pubescent advisers to find her a grim Northern shithole that voted Leave, where she can go and make a tub thumping speech telling the plebs that she's their Boudicea against the continental oppressors.
-
No doubt spouting the usual s**t as well including "must deliver etc etc" - and people I meet on the door step just say "get on with it" - the latter of course can mean anything !
The people are fed up they want a conclusion (win lose or draw) - but they the Politicians use "get on with it" to mean get on with Leaving which is NOT the same - so they lump everyone together
-
Read this and weep at the bunch of useless, back-covering, blame-shifting, worthless nobodies we've got governing us at the moment.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1103939031761510400
So THAT is what the PM's Grimsby speech is about. It's about playing the blame game for this unmitigated crisis that we're now barrelling into, that SHE has paved the way for.
-
Reading up on the last few posts. One thing about Theresa May, you can predict what shell so and then she will probably do something totally different and baffling.
-
I think it's called being divorced from reality BFYP.
-
TRB
If the first two votes turn down May's deal and No Deal, there's no way that Parliament wouldn't vote for an extension of A50. Because to vote against that in those circumstances is implicitly voting for No Deal.
I agree it would be illogical to vote against No Deal and then vote against requesting an extension. It will be fascinating to see which MPs manage to defy logic next week. Maybe a spread on how many? :-)
-
The frustrating thing is that the vote next week will allow 100 or so Tories to posture to their members by voting for No Deal, knowing full well that the more sensible MPs will save the country from that madness.
It's quite sickening seeing how the country is being f**ked about still, over something that has only ever been about who rules the Right of politics in this country.
-
Considering they went into administration yesterday, fairly sure theres a metaphor in here https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/23/amber-rudd-online-eu-registration-system-lk-bennett
-
One to ruin your weekend when you think that May might be in her final days.
https://mobile.twitter.com/retepelyod/status/1104093145921409024
-
Good god - although to be fair any 5 current random Labour Party Cabinet members would be equally frightening
In fact hard to think of 5 decent ones from either Party put together.
Anybody suggest anybody that they would see as a PM because most of them are well exposed
-
Jacob Rees Mogg?
-
JRM?
JFC!
-
Well, I wouldn't go that far but I believe some people think so.
-
JFW then.
-
If you want a PM who brings absolutely nothing of substantive merit to any discussion, who suavely lies through his f**king teeth with that patrician condescension that seems to impress so many working class folk, and whose one and only talent is an ability to bait the opposite side, then Rees-Mogg is your man.
It would be quite a fitting finale to the last few years in truth. Maybe we need to go through that crucible before we collectively recover our senses.
-
JFW then.
Jesus is probably weeping now, along with a lot of us.
-
Arron Banks. The man who led Farage's Leave campaign, funded by Kremlin money.
It doesn't matter how disgusting the previous news about him has been, there's always a deeper layer to the cess pit that he is.
https://www.channel4.com/news/the-banks-files-brexit-funder-urged-campaign-to-press-it-harder-after-jo-cox-murder
-
Arron Banks. The man who led Farage's Leave campaign, funded by Kremlin money.
It doesn't matter how disgusting the previous news about him has been, there's always a deeper layer to the cess pit that he is.
https://www.channel4.com/news/the-banks-files-brexit-funder-urged-campaign-to-press-it-harder-after-jo-cox-murder
Just shows how bent the referendum was :turd:
The guy should be locked up for a very long time.
-
I wish more of the working class who voted Brexit would watch things like this and actually realise the whole point of Brexit is nothing to do with helping us pondlife; the whole point of Brexit is to make the rich and elite richer. That's it!
-
BJW. Why didn't the rich and elite prevent us from joining in the first place?
-
BB
Simple really.
Because those at the heart of the financial sector, who stand to gain from the turmoil of Brexit, did not have the stranglehold on the Establishment that they do now.
Back in the 60s and early 70s, the Tory party was still populated by people who believed they had a responsibility to the entire country rather than to their own pockets.
Times change.
-
BST, you talk as if it is only The Tory party members who wanted Brexit.
-
unfortunately , not all . a lot of people have been conned by the lies of the (illegal) leave campaign , but before that, decades of EU criticism from the right wing press , including the Sun . owned by non British billionares who want to avoid UK tax and be allowed to shaft the UK as they see fit , unhindered by the pesky EU.
-
BB
I was answering your question. I assumed, it being your question, you wanted it answering. If instead it was just an excuse to take the discussion off down another rabbit hole, then have fun. I'll leave you to it.
-
Na then owd lad. I never asked you to get involved in the first place.
-
Then you could have ignored what I said.
Goodnight.
-
I've never noticed anybody inviting BB to get involved but he still does.
-
I just assumed on an open thread that anyone was welcome to join in. If you have a specific question that you don't want anyone else to get involved in, there's PMs.
-
BST. I responded to your reply. It was you who started the sarcasm with your response to that!
-
BB
But that's just it. You didn't respond to my reply. You started off a totally different line. I gave you a clear and substantia or answer to the specific question you posed, and your response was to say something totally different.
I haven't really got the energy or the time to keep on engaging with you like that so I'm going to leave you to it.
-
Back on substantive points, David Davis on the Marr show has just shown the rotten core of the Leave argument. The glib lying that underpins everything they argue about.
Davis has just said that we should still threaten No Deal because the EU is terrified about it. He said "Every study has shown that the effect of No Deal will be an order of magnitude worse for the EU than for us."
That is absolute, copper plated b*llocks. But there's an ex-senior Govt minister sat on national TV, spouting it. And not being held to account on it.
-
BST. I responded to your reply! It told you what I thought of it! I thought it gave an impression that you thought it was only Tory party members who wanted Brexit.
In response to your second paragraph, I never asked you to get involved in the first place!
-
BB
You were asking about the rich and elite in the 1970s. I gave you an answer on that. For some reason, you extrapolated from that an (incorrect) assumption about who I think supports Brexit now.
If you extract something useful from doing that then I chuffed for you. Me, I'm done.
-
If you are interested in speculating how Tuesday's vote will go there is a great spreadsheet linked here showing what the compiler thinks each individual MP's views are.
Projected result - defeat of over 200 and not yet enough support for a 2nd ref.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK
-
Wilts, some useful information. Sorry for stating the obvious but there is currently no changes to the withdrawal agreement as we stand so it doesn't take some complex analysis to know the vote is almost certainly going the same way it went last time (save for some minor shifts in 'conscience'). It seems to me a formality that A50 will be extended.
The grown-up question the government really needs to ask themselves are the terms upon which they will re-enter negotiations. It can't be May's current terms that is clear. She has to look at the arithmetic in parliament - pandering to her party/hard brexit simply won't get through because there are least 30 approximately of her own MPs who don't support this.
-
Coops
You're assessment of what May should do makes sense only if you start from the premise that this is about Brexit.
I've thought for a very long time now that it's about nothing of the sort. It's about who rules the Tory party.
May, clearly, is hanging on for as long as she possibly can and is therefore utterly incapable of doing what you are suggesting. Because the only thing at the moment that might command a Parliamentary majority is a very watered down Brexit. And that would be the end of her because it would mean open civil war in the Tory party and the end of the last vestige of control that she might have.
Meanwhile, the ERG types (and every one of the more moderate front runners to replace are ramping up the "betrayal of democracy" line about a delay. Not because they think this smooths the Brexit path. Because they are playing to the blue rinse, flat earth Tory membership for the eventual leadership challenge. They are saying, "See! I was on your side all along. It's the other bas**rds who betrayed you! So vote for me when the time comes."
Go back over the past generation and a half and that's all that the Europe debate has ever been about. Who holds sway in the f**king Tory party. And to think how many Labour working class folk have been duped into being pawns in this game...
-
If you are interested in speculating how Tuesday's vote will go there is a great spreadsheet linked here showing what the compiler thinks each individual MP's views are.
Projected result - defeat of over 200 and not yet enough support for a 2nd ref.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK
The end game problem though is that if they go for a 3 month delay it solves nothing. It's 3 months since vote 1 and nothing has changed. Nothing is going to change so it's just delaying a problem that at the moment unless there's a change in government policy is likely to stay.
Either side could move to reach an agreement, neither side will.
-
BFYP
The EU has moved massively to give us the option of the backstop. Tory sources say May was ecstatic when she got that deal.
What else do you think the EU should give on?
-
Coops
You're assessment of what May should do makes sense only if you start from the premise that this is about Brexit.
I've thought for a very long time now that it's about nothing of the sort. It's about who rules the Tory party.
May, clearly, is hanging on for as long as she possibly can and is therefore utterly incapable of doing what you are suggesting. Because the only thing at the moment that might command a Parliamentary majority is a very watered down Brexit. And that would be the end of her because it would mean open civil war in the Tory party and the end of the last vestige of control that she might have.
Meanwhile, the ERG types (and every one of the more moderate front runners to replace are ramping up the "betrayal of democracy" line about a delay. Not because they think this smooths the Brexit path. Because they are playing to the blue rinse, flat earth Tory membership for the eventual leadership challenge. They are saying, "See! I was on your side all along. It's the other bas**rds who betrayed you! So vote for me when the time comes."
Go back over the past generation and a half and that's all that the Europe debate has ever been about. Who holds sway in the f**king Tory party. And to think how many Labour working class folk have been duped into being pawns in this game...
Looks like a highly paid pundit has finally caught up with what's going on here.
https://m.facebook.com/1498276767163730/posts/2294860554172010/
Christ up above, it's not bloody hard to see is it? This isn't about Brexiters and never was. It's about who leads the Tory party.
-
Surprise! ''Brexit talks 'deadlocked', says Downing Street''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/11/brexit-talks-deadlocked-says-downing-street
''Brexit: Tories suspect May could pull Tuesday's key vote after talks fail to deliver progress - Politics live''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/mar/11/brexit-latest-news-vote-tuesday-tories-suspect-may-could-pull-tuesdays-key-vote-after-talks-fail-to-deliver-progress-politics-live
-
If she does pull the vote, I wonder if Corbyn will choose the moment to launch another vote of Confidence? Lots of MPs on both sides of the argument will be very angry and might vote to bring her down (and the Government).
Alternatively the Cabinet could collectively express no confidence in her (as they did with Mrs. Thatcher). Or she could face a Contempt of Parliament motion which if she lost she'd have to go.
-
Talk about a shot across the bows from Nick Boles!
https://order-order.com/2019/03/11/boles-threatens-may-no-confidence-delays-meaningful-vote/
And there's more:
https://mobile.twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1105058412293955584?p=v
The writers of The Thick of it couldn't have come up with something like this.
-
The ante is being raised by the hour.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105074130284613633
This is final the crisis moment. Not really any more space for May to shuffle into.
-
This is what the Government seems to be considering:
https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1105030917846908933
I doubt it will be enough to satisfy MPs who want a Meaningful Vote this week. Smacks of more May can-kicking.
-
That would be entirely unacceptable TRB. She guaranteed a meaningful vote for tomorrow. If she tries to renege on that, with just 13 working days till Brexit, Parliament has to take over and sideline her.
It WILL be a constitutional crisis, but it will be entirely May's doing.
-
Yes a better option for her is to do it, she'll lose it but that makes no difference to her really.
Ironically it's a pointless vote isn't it. There's not really anywhere for her to go, she doesn't want to resign but realistically she should do. She just doesn't do real.
-
The ante is being raised by the hour.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105074130284613633
This is final the crisis moment. Not really any more space for May to shuffle into.
I've been thinking that for a few months now BST. She always seems to find a way to wriggle on. I suspect it has something to do with her belief that God is guiding her.
-
That would be entirely unacceptable TRB. She guaranteed a meaningful vote for tomorrow. If she tries to renege on that, with just 13 working days till Brexit, Parliament has to take over and sideline her.
It WILL be a constitutional crisis, but it will be entirely May's doing.
I agree it would be unacceptable.
-
I would still vote leave.
-
Channel 4 Dispatches - The Brexit Millionaires: looking at those who have made millions from the Brexit result - seems an essential watch tonight (whilst we wait to see what May has failed to get from Strasbourg).
-
What the f**k can you do?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-47523168
Ex-Cabinet Ministers and senior political functionaries Tweeting this bullshit.
I suggest we bring back public lashing for politicians who spread shit on Twitter and don't make grovelling apologies when the shit they post is shown to be shit.
Like Rees-Mogg last year, re-Tweeting bullshit from The Sun about how much cheaper a whole range of goods would be after we left the EU because we would have lower tariffs. Except every single example was wrong and massively over-inflated the claims. And he never once apologised for misleading people, despite a number of trade tariff academics directly messaging him to point out the error.
These are the people you are siding with Keith.
-
This thread might be quiet for the next 24 hrs....
-
Well it's genius use of language.
It appears we now have a "legally binding" backstop deal to give us precisely the backstop that we had before.
May's having a last roll if the dice to see down the ERG. Where we go now depends on whether they really have the balls they've been threatening to swing round for the last year.
-
I'm a bit confused. What's actually changed? As far as I can tell the withdrawal agreement hasn't been changed one iota. Am I mental or is that actually what's happened here?
-
Have a look at what's been agreed tonight. Then ask yourself what the cause for celebration is.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/commission_communication-11march2019.pdf
-
Basically nothing has changed other than we now have assurances on the backstop.
The deal is still hopeless and leaves us in limbo.
The hard Brexiteers in the ERG aren't getting what they want and anyone with any sense on the other side will see its far worse than just staying in.
I hope they have the balls to vote it down again.
-
I'm a bit confused. What's actually changed? As far as I can tell the withdrawal agreement hasn't been changed one iota. Am I mental or is that actually what's happened here?
About sums it up. Legal tall to shut up the erg types. I'd hope may got assurances on what they want otherwise what's the point?
-
It appears the ERG’s position wil depend on the DUP’s position
-
She will offer the DUP another mountain of cash. Probably every Penny that Grayling would have wasted in the next year.
Rich pickings indeed for a 10 Seat Party who "amassed" 292000 Votes in the flawed First Past the Post System giving them "skewed" importance - The Green Party got roughly twice as many votes for just 1 Seat
The DUP were then rewarded (source BBC Website) - and today they may get rewarded again
What is in it for the DUP?
As well as the obvious influence and prestige of being involved with the UK government, there will also be £1bn more spent on Northern Ireland over the next two years than had previously been planned. They have also got agreement on a range of policy priorities - such as keeping the guarantee to increase state pensions by at least 2.5% a year, to maintain defence spending and to maintain agriculture spending in Northern Ireland at the same level for the rest of the current Parliament (which theoretically takes us to June 2022). Read more: Where the money will be spent
.
-
I'm a bit confused. What's actually changed? As far as I can tell the withdrawal agreement hasn't been changed one iota. Am I mental or is that actually what's happened here?
It's the oldest political trick in the book - give something unpopular a different name and pretend it's new and different. It works on the public time after time but I can't believe May thinks it'll work on a room full of politicians.
-
It now entirely depends on whether the ERG have the courage of their convictions that they've used to f**k the country about for 2 years, or if they are looking for a way out of the mess they've led us into.
-
I should add. That's a way out for THEM, not for the country. This deal will still leave us in the shit as a nation.
-
For the ERG though they can claim a win now so it to me seems sensible they back it, but they aren't sensible.
Let's not forget this is only an interim possible agreement. The full agreement will be even tougher.
-
How do they claim a win?
They have been in full-on Henry V mode for the past year, I distinguished that we would t be held to ransom by the EU over Ireland, and specifically that they could not vote for a deal that means we did not have the unilateral right to leave the backstop arrangement.
This is what May agreed yesterday.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Raphael_Hogarth/status/1105249024037269504
So we will not have the unilateral right to leave the backstop.
If the ERG votes for this deal now, after taking May to the point of collapse and getting precisely nothing in return, it would be like a boxer having their opponent on the ropes in the last minute of the 12th, pulling back the fist to land the killer blow, then chucking in the towel.
They'll be revealed for the piss and wind merchants I've long thought them to be.
-
This is the Bill that they'll be voting on tonight.
https://mobile.twitter.com/labourwhips/status/1105239134657015811/photo/1
Paragraph 3. The deal that May did last night (which, as far as I can see, is identical to her previous deal, but there you go) "...reduces the risk..." of us not being able to leave the backstop.
If the ERG votes for that after all they've said, they are spineless idiots. Which is not to say that they won't vote for it.
-
Since it's now all down to interpretation of legalese, it's useful that Labour's Kier Starmer has been a QC for nearly 2 decades.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1105374833410560001
In layman's terms, the Attorney General is going to stand up in front of Parliament and dissemble his way through telling everyone that this is a game changer. Some of the ERG are going to use that to climb down. But here's Starmer, with a QC's forensic eye, pointing out calmly and logically that nowt has actually changed.
Edit:
On which topic.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105403232707325952
And
https://mobile.twitter.com/Geoffrey_Cox/status/1105393787243778053?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1105393787243778053&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47529293
Be fascinating watching Cox squirm in the House later today.
-
It's totally obvious what's happened bst, they have confused the 'let' rule in squash with the backstop. ffs
College coaches and players should be particularly aware of two rules: the “best effort let” and “fishing for strokes.” Best Effort Let: The rules of squash indicate that a player must have demonstrated a “best effort” to attempt to play a ball in the case of interference by the other player.
-
Politicians voting differently on the same thing twice is how the 'establishment' lost trust with the British people in the first place and Brexit happened.
-
The key para of Geoffrey Cox's advice, just published.
19. However, the legal risk remains unchanged that if through no such demonstrable failure of either party, but simply because of intractable differences, that situation does arise, the United Kingdom would have, at least while the fundamental circumstances remained the same, no internationally lawful means of exiting the Protocol’s arrangements, save by agreement
I don't think that's going to be acceptable to the DUP or the ERG. Everybody back on the bus.
-
Paragraph 19 from Attorney General looks like bad news for May
However the MPs will now be voting politically - with the can kicked down the road they face a choice. Her deal with its Clauses (new and improved we are told) or Leave with No Deal or dont leave at all
-
Indeed, does this advice really mean they want to stop the deal completely that's the choice they have to make. Likely they will reject it again and the rest of us stuck in the middle. I don't know where we go from here.
Of course the dup may change their stance when it comes down to it.
-
Name all the MPs who change their mind and publicly flog them with turnips and other route vegetables is my opinion.
-
Indeed, does this advice really mean they want to stop the deal completely that's the choice they have to make. Likely they will reject it again and the rest of us stuck in the middle. I don't know where we go from here.
Of course the dup may change their stance when it comes down to it.
I dont think that anyone does to be fair - so dont do yourself down !
-
Odds on the vote being pulled?
-
Game over, it seems.
-
if the ERG and DUP vote for this deal now, why on earth didn't they vote for it in January. Because it's the same thing.
If they DO vote for it now, they are admitting that they have just wasted a critical two months in which they could have been giving some leadership to the country and to business[1], and admitting that they have royally pissed off partners across the Channel that we'll be wanting to do business with in the future.
[1] On which topic, I see that our GDP growth for the three months to January was an anemic 0.2%. We're barely keepin gout of recession, and even this growth is thought to be, to some extent, due to companies stockpiling materials in case of a No deal Brexit.
-
Fair play to Cox. I suspect that in the Cabinet meeting this morning, they put the thumbscrews on him to give a positive gloss. But it appears he's put professional integrity above that.
-
Odds on the vote being pulled?
Not a chance. There was some kite-flying yesterday to the effect that the vote could be pulled or made indicative. That provoked threats of No Confidence. The Government is more scared of a General Election than it is of losing this vote.
-
if the ERG and DUP vote for this deal now, why on earth didn't they vote for it in January. Because it's the same thing.
If they DO vote for it now, they are admitting that they have just wasted a critical two months in which they could have been giving some leadership to the country and to business[1], and admitting that they have royally pissed off partners across the Channel that we'll be wanting to do business with in the future.
[1] On which topic, I see that our GDP growth for the three months to January was an anemic 0.2%. We're barely keepin gout of recession, and even this growth is thought to be, to some extent, due to companies stockpiling materials in case of a No deal Brexit.
BBC reporting half those that voted against it in January, are voting for it tonight
-
Fair play to Cox. I suspect that in the Cabinet meeting this morning, they put the thumbscrews on him to give a positive gloss. But it appears he's put professional integrity above that.
Quite right too.
The interesting point from him is that legally there's a chance their fears could happen, but he feels it very unlikely. The Brexiters have a choice now, is that enough for them to vote for the deal and risk there being no EU deal or no EU leave? It may well be the best they can ever get, do they want to risk it and push it further or take what they've got? I think there's more chance of the DUP folding than some Tories and my gut is government will lose but by a smaller margin.
-
Personally I was hoping that she would come back with something that scraped home in the vote today.However with the attorney general stating the legal position on the backstop hasn't changed then I would hope it doesn't go through because that calls Parliaments integrity into question because nothing has really changed for this vote...
Reality is this will be voted down on a reduced defeat as will the vote on no deal and we will have to go cap in hand asking for a extension...However lets not forget here that the EU have our nuts in a vice and are determined to squeeze,they are refusing to play ball in the hope we end up going with Labours plan of brexit in name only with no real brexit involved...
-
BFYP
But as I keep on saying, it's not about Brexit for the ERG. It's about taking control of the Tory party.
Always has been.
They would prefer to stay in the EU than give the centre-wing of the Tory party a win. Then they can say to the constituency party members who are virulently Europhobic: Look! Look what the centrists have done! You need to elect more of us and we'll represent you properly.
This morning has been a show. they needed to be seen to be carefully considering this deal, so that THEY don't get the blame from the members when Brexit collapses. I'll admit, for a moment I was wobbling on this view. i wasn't sure they had the balls to carry on with their plan, but it's clear now that that is happening.
The ERG will vote down this plan.
The Commons will vote down No Deal and vote for an extension. The ERG will vote the opposite way.
The EU will say "what do you want an extension for? There's no sign of you agreeing to anything. We'll give you an extension if you hold Ref 2 to sort your shit out."
And the ERG will be a step closer to controlling the Tory party, because they'll say: WE would have gone for No Deal. It's THEIR fault that you've got Ref2.
Bunch of con men, the f**king lot of them. Using Northern working class voters to get to their final aim. Which is to have a country that shits on the Northern working class.
-
WingCo.
I'm at my wit's end trying to explain this.
What more did you want the EU to do?
WE chose to leave the CU. That is the root cause of ALL of this. We cannot leave the CU without causing serious harm to Ireland. So the EU offered us a way out - the backstop. SA means whereby we could kick the can down the road in the hope that there'd be a solution to the Irish border in future.
That is the ONLY way that the EU are prepared to have trade discussions with us. Once Ireland's position is secure. If we want, we can leave with no deal but this will f**k all over Ireland. So we will not then et a trade deal with the EU.
It's REALLY simple. We're not being held to ransom. The EU are simply looking after their own. We were told by the Leavers that the EU would collapse at our feet and beg us for a deal. As with so man other things, the Leavers lied to you.
The EU are simply holding to a line that they set out years ago. If they allow the UK to walk away from the backstop, they are effectively saying to Ireland (an EU member) "f**k you! We are sacrificing you to appease the Brits."
That was never going to happen and SHOULD never happen.
So what exactly DO you mean when you say the EU have our nuts in a vice? WE have put our nuts in the vice and WE are turning the screw.
-
ERG have recommended that MPs vote against.
Bye Bye Can-Kicker May.
-
Another no confidence motion anyone?
-
Just take a step back and try to imagine how this looks to the rest of the world.
Theresa may scuttling off round Europe for the past two months, achieving absolutely nothing because nothing could be achieved. Then expecting a different result.
We're the UK for f**ks sake. We used to have a reputation for common sense and pragmatism and knowing how to build alliances.
Look at us now.
Run by a parish council leader who somehow has got in out of her depth and is totally divorced from reality.
What a f**king embarrassment we have become.
-
https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1105423352733282304
-
ERG set to abstain
-
From twitter
"Here is a turd."
"I don't want the turd."
"You f**king traitor. I went to a lot of trouble to get you the turd. Take it."
"I will not."
[later]
"I got you something."
"Is it a turd?"
"Yes, but I also have a piece of paper with the words 'THIS IS NOT A TURD' written on it.
-
Can anyone tell me what the purpose of this "debate" in the HoC is? Surely every MP has decided by now how they are going to vote? Seems just an opportunity for MPs to spout endless hot air and posture. Get on with the vote, ffs!
-
I have the solution!!
Section 20 (4) (a) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 says:
(4)A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—
(a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom
so all we have to do is have a Minister with the balls to change the leaving date for one fifty years in the future and for subsequent Ministers to do the same again when required.
That way, we'd be permanently leaving and permanently remaining. QED! :silly:
-
Latest rumour is that when May's Deal is voted down tonight she will announce she is to ask the EU for an extension to Article 50.
Personally I think that is just a tactic to put pressure on the Brexiteers but we'll see later.
-
I'm watching parliament live. Backbench Tory MP just called May's deal a polished turd. In parliament.
-
Our MP in Newquay/St Austell, Steve double. He's toast it's rampant Brexit here!!!
-
Our MP in Newquay/St Austell, Steve double. He's toast it's rampant Brexit here!!!
That's the one.
-
Latest rumour is that when May's Deal is voted down tonight she will announce she is to ask the EU for an extension to Article 50.
Personally I think that is just a tactic to put pressure on the Brexiteers but we'll see later.
Won't that be on Thursday? Tomorrow is if we want to allow No Deal then it's whether we want to extend?
-
May confirmed she is sticking to the Parliamentary timetable.
Now the deal has gone down I wonder if the EU decides to wash its hands of the UK and accept that we leave without a deal. Irrespective of how the Parliamentary vote on No Deal goes tomorrow.
-
No TRB, they won't.
Because the EU isn't the evil dictatorship that many here paint it as.
What they SHOULD do is to say "We WILL give you an extension but only on the condition that you give us a clear plan on what you plan to do with it."
The obvious thing being a second referendum. And if that destroys the Tory party and the Labour party, so be it.
-
By the way, it is utterly beyond belief that May is giving the Tory party a free vote tomorrow.
Think what that means.
The biggest crisis since WWII and the Govt doesn't have a stance on it.
This has never happened in history. It is Government totally and unequivocally losing control.
As I keep saying...chuckling over vodka in the Kremlin tonight.
-
Teresa May has been saying for 2 years that No Deal is better than a Bad Deal - and for the past 6 months that if parliament doesn't pass her deal then we will leave on 29th March with No Deal.
So which way will she vote tomorrow?
-
By the way, it is utterly beyond belief that May is giving the Tory party a free vote tomorrow.
Think what that means.
The biggest crisis since WWII and the Govt doesn't have a stance on it.
This has never happened in history. It is Government totally and unequivocally losing control.
As I keep saying...chuckling over vodka in the Kremlin tonight.
It's all too believable. It's another variant of kicking the can down the road because she can't been seen to support one side or the other. If she whips her party - in either way, for or against - the other half of the party will rebel against the whip. And everybody will know it. And some more of whatever little credibility she still has sails off into the sunset.
-
Teresa May has been saying for 2 years that No Deal is better than a Bad Deal - and for the past 6 months that if parliament doesn't pass her deal then we will leave on 29th March with No Deal.
So which way will she vote tomorrow?
She hasn't said that since this deal was agreed with the EU. I wonder why not... :lol:
-
Waiting for the eu to say no extension?
-
No TRB, they won't.
Because the EU isn't the evil dictatorship that many here paint it as.
What they SHOULD do is to say "We WILL give you an extension but only on the condition that you give us a clear plan on what you plan to do with it."
The obvious thing being a second referendum. And if that destroys the Tory party and the Labour party, so be it.
I think that would be a reasonable approach by the EU and is probably the one it will take. But it won't be a short extension because the most likely moves to break the impasse - a General Election or a Referendum - will take time to organise.
Personally I think the Brexiteers were stupid not to back May's Deal. Not because it is particularly good but because it does (eventually) take us out of the EU. What we end up with now is likely to be a Softer Brexit (Norway-plus) or Remain.
-
https://euworthit.uk/
Nice tool.
-
TRB
As I keep repeating, it's not about Brexit for the ERG. It's about the future soul of the Tory party.
Accept that and everything they do makes sense.
-
As I was saying.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1105559662018134017?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1105559662018134017&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47529293
Brexiters. MPs like this are treating you like imbeciles.
It's too late for any further negotiation. He's not announcing this out of consideration for the good of the country. He's announcing it because it bolsters his cred with the Europhobic Little Englanders who make up the Tory party membership, and many of their voters.
-
TRB
As I keep repeating, it's not about Brexit for the ERG. It's about the future soul of the Tory party.
Accept that and everything they do makes sense.
Actually Robert Peston supports my original point.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/03/were-now-heading-for-a-no-deal-brexit-but-not-just-yet/
-
The problem is that view seriously underplays the other side of the relationship. There are certain countries (Ireland, the Netherlands, Lithuania to name the obvious ones) who need quite substantially a good working relationship with the UK going forward (on many issues). Not to mention the 1.3 million of us living in the EU, the majority of which taxpaying citizens in EU countries (who are still in limbo).
The EU commission has consistently said a 'no-deal' brexit is damaging to the EU. Their press-releases read like they are preparing for nuclear war. Why would they want this for EU citizens? They don't. It's a very simplistic shrug of the hands gesture that Peston makes in that article as if the EU is a black-box, it isn't.
-
Caroline Flint voted with the Government tonight
-
No surprise from Flint that.
Only Labour new recruit tonight.
The problem is "no deal" remains the default.
Even when the HoC votes it out tomorrow, that does not bind the EU.
They are only going to extend if there is a new proposal to discuss.
So it is either Norway+, or a coming general election or Ref2.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/12/theresa-may-mps-crisis-deal-delay-brexit
1) No numbers for Ref2, at present.
2) Toxic Treeza steps down and a new leader takes over and seeks a GE mandate?
3) Or we drift on to the end of March and crash out without a deal?
Lets see if Norway+ comes out of the fog, eh!
-
No surprise from Flint that.
Only Labour new recruit tonight.
The problem is "no deal" remains the default.
Even when the HoC votes it out tomorrow, that does not bind the EU.
They are only going to extend if there is a new proposal to discuss.
So it is either Norway+, or a coming general election or Ref2.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/12/theresa-may-mps-crisis-deal-delay-brexit
1) No numbers for Ref2, at present.
2) Toxic Treeza steps down and a new leader takes over and seeks a GE mandate?
3) Or we drift on to the end of March and crash out without a deal?
Lets see if Norway+ comes out of the fog, eh!
We’ve only got to this point because she has run the clock down, a massive dereliction of duty
-
Caroline Flint voted with the Government tonight
.... and I hope the Monster Raving Loony Party put up a Candidate fo the next GE - becasue I have voted in every one in my lifetime - and I want someone to vote for instead of her
-
Teresa May has been saying for 2 years that No Deal is better than a Bad Deal - and for the past 6 months that if parliament doesn't pass her deal then we will leave on 29th March with No Deal.
So which way will she vote tomorrow?
Knowing her she will table an amendment saying " you can vote for No Deal or avoid it completely by voting for My Deal - as it delivers on the Will of the British people - it helps us to leave the EU on the 29th March 2019 a- nd it was produced as a result of having my strong and stable Government"
Only joking of course !
-
No surprise from Flint that.
Only Labour new recruit tonight.
The problem is "no deal" remains the default.
Even when the HoC votes it out tomorrow, that does not bind the EU.
They are only going to extend if there is a new proposal to discuss.
So it is either Norway+, or a coming general election or Ref2.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/12/theresa-may-mps-crisis-deal-delay-brexit
1) No numbers for Ref2, at present.
2) Toxic Treeza steps down and a new leader takes over and seeks a GE mandate?
3) Or we drift on to the end of March and crash out without a deal?
Lets see if Norway+ comes out of the fog, eh!
That's a pretty good summary of where we are. I think when May goes to the EU she will be told she can have an extension, but only a lengthy one, to allow time for a General Election or another Referendum.
I don't think there is enough support in the current HoC for another Referendum. There might be following a General Election though.
-
Our emotional spasm in a nutshell.
A Kantor poll a couple of days ago.
Q. How important is it for you that after Brexit there is no right for EU citizens to live in the UK?
Important 46%
Not important 34%
Q. How important is it for you that, after Brexit, UK citizens have the right to live in the EU?
Important 56%
Not important 24%
You know what? Anyone who talks about respecting The Will of The People can f**k right off, because the Will of The People is batshit.
-
You'll have heard a lot of piss and wind recently about how threatening to leave with No Deal is a brilliant negotiating strategy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47551266
If we leave with No Deal, we plan to unilaterally introduce a situation where 92% of our imports from outside the EU have no tariffs. Currently, the figure is 56%.
This isn't really a choice.
We have to keep most EU trade tariff-free because it would be catastrophic to impose tariffs. Our economy is built around free trade with Europe.
But WTO rules (you'll have heard Rees-Mogg saying they're something to embrace) say that we cannot have zero tariffs with Europe and different tariffs with the rest of the world.
So, think about that.
Remember that the rest of the world will not be doing that for our exports to them.
When we do that, and then go to China, USA, Japan, India, Canada, Australia etc and ask for trade deals, what do you think they are going to say? Could it be, "Why do we need a deal? We've got a fantastic situation with you, because you let us export to you tariff-free, but we can still out tariffs on your exports to us to protect our own manufacturers."
-
Well. As I was saying.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105762653794910208
Peston's usually more than 30 minutes behind me. He's on form this morning.
-
Our emotional spasm in a nutshell.
A Kantor poll a couple of days ago.
Q. How important is it for you that after Brexit there is no right for EU citizens to live in the UK?
Important 46%
Not important 34%
Q. How important is it for you that, after Brexit, UK citizens have the right to live in the EU?
Important 56%
Not important 24%
You know what? Anyone who talks about respecting The Will of The People can f**k right off, because the Will of The People is batshit.
Ah, you'd prefer a socialist dictator?
That's always worked well hasn't it?
-
Thanks BS for once again demonstrating that yawning chasm between Input and Output where most of us have logical analysis.
You:
Input: Whatever
Output: Blah, blah, blah, tired and idiotic communism, lefty, socialist insult.
What I would like (and it's a shame I have to spell it out, but I'm used to it by now) is a national debate where people are encouraged by politicians to f**king grow up and make some hard choices. Instead of what we've had for three years from Brexiters, which is that you can have everything you want, with sprinkles on top.
-
Our emotional spasm in a nutshell.
A Kantor poll a couple of days ago.
Q. How important is it for you that after Brexit there is no right for EU citizens to live in the UK?
Important 46%
Not important 34%
Q. How important is it for you that, after Brexit, UK citizens have the right to live in the EU?
Important 56%
Not important 24%
You know what? Anyone who talks about respecting The Will of The People can f**k right off, because the Will of The People is batshit.
Have your cake and eat it.
-
Thanks BS for once again demonstrating that yawning chasm between Input and Output where most of us have logical analysis.
You:
Input: Whatever
Output: Blah, blah, blah, tired and idiotic communism, lefty, socialist insult.
What I would like (and it's a shame I have to spell it out, but I'm used to it by now) is a national debate where people are encouraged by politicians to f**king grow up and make some hard choices. Instead of what we've had for three years from Brexiters, which is that you can have everything you want, with sprinkles on top.
🎣
-
Very good! Well done!
So is that all that Brexiters have left in the tank now? Baiting the other side?
How are those party plan for 29 March coming along?
-
Whenever we leave, it's gonna be sweet seeing remainers pissing and bleeting about it.
There's still a very good chance that will be 29th March.
-
Whenever we leave, it's gonna be sweet seeing remainers pissing and bleeting about it.
There's still a very good chance that will be 29th March.
Well it will be their own fault. They had the chance of a deal and rejected it.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
-
It seems Malthouse is the new bit of nonsense for Mogg and his disaster capitalist friends to distract us with while they push through no deal and make millions. Malthouse is nonsense. It's like me unilaterally voting for a £300k a week pay rise. It's nonsense that the EU won't agree to, and they know it.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
-
Interesting that the traitors in Parliament aren't the ones backing a campaign that was illegally funded by a malicious foreign power in order to line their own pockets. See, to me, that's the textbook definition of treason.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
There's a correlation between intelligence and whether you voted Brexit. People on here who can string two sentences together more than likely voted/want to remain. The people that can't spell their own name and aren't on here more than likely voted to leave. The education in our area had clearly let us down over the years.
-
it's all getting a bit tiresome isn't it..i really don't know what the answer is..These pages are full of arguments and reasoning but the reality is people have there own opinions that wont be changed now..
Billy spends a lot of time on here explaining his well thought out thoughts on socialism but will it change my mind on it?? No because I personally don't believe it's sustainable without getting into huge debt and I've yet to see it work well enough to convince me..But I believe in democracy so if it transpires that left wing Labour get in then that's how the cooky crumbles...
On Brexit we have May's plan that obviously wont get the backing of Parliament no matter how many times it's rolled out to vote on.On the other side weve Labours soft brexit which the EU would jump at but also will never get voted through because In reality it's a brexit in name only and the tory's would never go for that never mind the ERG...
A no deal will be voted off today and rightly so (something most agree on) so that leaves a extension to article 50 the most likely scenario,but to what end??? it'snot as if we are even close to agreeing so what will 6 weeks help?? Plus the EU are not forced to accept that either unless they have a idea why we want one and to what end...
The first referendum was a floored process,neither side knew the full facts on both sides of the argument,so maybe it's time I changed my mind and agree to a proper peoples vote again.However this time the ballot paper need to give more information other than a simple stay or go..So when its voted for this time there is a clear instruction on what the country wants..
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
There's a correlation between intelligence and whether you voted Brexit. People on here who can string two sentences together more than likely voted/want to remain. The people that can't spell their own name and aren't on here more than likely voted to leave. The education in our area had clearly let us down over the years.
Are you one of these people that thinks people who went to university should get two votes because you're better than the rest of us?
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
I'm proud to be working class. I never went to university as we couldn't afford anything like that, but it never stopped me picking up a book to widen my knowledge. The middle classes really get up my wick looking down their nose at Mr Average when most of what they have is handed down by mummy and daddy.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
So you think that Teresa May should have voted in the Commons the same way her constituents voted in the referendum. I'd have loved to have watched that happen for the past two years. Entertainment Gold.
-
See my posting of 7th March. I don't think May accepts her deal is dead. If, as I expect, the EU27 play hard-ball over an extension, she will bring it back and say it's my deal or No Deal.
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
I'm proud to be working class. I never went to university as we couldn't afford anything like that, but it never stopped me picking up a book to widen my knowledge. The middle classes really get up my wick looking down their nose at Mr Average when most of what they have is handed down by mummy and daddy.
But you side with Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage?
-
Remind me again what the definition of Treason is.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1105795719720505345
Not that Treason would be unusual from Banks and Farage.
See, my memory's not what it was, but I'm sure the aim of Leave was for the UK to take back control as a sovereign nation, and not be held to ransom by foreign bas**rds.
By the way. Here's a thing. Salvini has also been negotiating with Putin for Kremlin money. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
-
Spelman-Dromey amendment passed. So No Deal is ruled out, at least as far as the HoC is concerned.
-
You couldn't make it up. Cue Brexiters on this thread completely ignoring that point and focusing on that time a Remainer said something mean to them once so the whole thing is justified.
No-deal Brexit is provisionally off the table now, at least, although by a worryingly fine margin.
-
Malthouse Compromise amendment heavily defeated. The EU didn't have any interest in it, so it wouldn't have offered a solution.
-
Apparently the Government is now telling Tory MPs to vote against its own amended motion!
-
The amended No Deal motion carried by 43 votes.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
There's a correlation between intelligence and whether you voted Brexit. People on here who can string two sentences together more than likely voted/want to remain. The people that can't spell their own name and aren't on here more than likely voted to leave. The education in our area had clearly let us down over the years.
Are you one of these people that thinks people who went to university should get two votes because you're better than the rest of us?
I never went to uni babe x
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
Are you suggesting I'm middle class? :lol:
I'm from New Rosso and as pretty working class as they come.
-
Why has Corbyn now switched back to wanting his Brexit, a GE and an extention to Article 50? What happened to Labour pushing for a second referendum?
-
Vote on requesting an extension tomorrow. The Brexiteers should be praying that the EU only offers a very short one - to 22nd May and no further.
If not, we might never leave. Welcome to the Hotel California!
-
It’s obvious May is looking to try a third vote on her deal
-
Why has Corbyn now switched back to wanting his Brexit and an extention to Article 50? What happened to Labour pushing for a second referendum?
Corbyn wants to avoid a Second Referendum at all costs. He wants a General Election and if he wins he wants to go to the EU with his Brexit-in-name-only.
To be honest, I don't think there's very much enthusiasm on either side of Parliament for a Second Referendum. Those who favour it tend to be very vocal about it, but they are not large in terms of numbers.
-
It’s obvious May is looking to try a third vote on her deal
Quite correct, and if she gets it, the Brexiteers should hold their noses and vote for it.
-
Looks like there WILL be another vote on May's Deal next week.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105928876436480002?p=v
-
Looks like there WILL be another vote on May's Deal next week.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105928876436480002?p=v
It’s just ridiculous, how many votes is it going to take?
-
It only needs one. She is doing what Corbyn said, running down the clock and hoping for the best. Ironically her deal is probably the best for pro Brexit members of her party.
-
May has lost the trust of parliament, she has lost the control of her cabinet, and she's lost her voice.
This 3rd vote is her last stand, if it fails she'll walk because you can see physically and politically she has no energy to renegotiate a new deal. I didn't think it would ever happen voluntarily but I think she'll resign.
-
Tory MP and ERG deputy chairman Steve Baker calls on the government to go back to Brussels and tell the EU that no matter how many times the meaningful vote is had, Theresa May's deal "will not pass".
"When meaningful vote three comes back I will see to it that we will keep voting it down," he adds, noting that the ERG will not support the "rotten" deal, no matter how many times it is brought back.
-
Why has Corbyn now switched back to wanting his Brexit, a GE and an extention to Article 50? What happened to Labour pushing for a second referendum?
I encourage you to listen to the BBC Bexitcast from last night. Starmer was on it and explained this. They decided (as a group, not just Corbyn) to concentrate on defeating the gov, ruling out no deal, & getting the extension this week.
A ref ammendment may have affected the way some Lab MP's voted on these (this my interpretation of Starmer).
Seeing as how the PM's authority has gone & the Tory party is tearing itself apart - backbenchers calling for Gov Ministers to be sacked - a good call I would reckon.
Thornbury on Radio 5 today said they expect it go down next week - but after tonights events that may change!
-
They’ve finally gone mad in the HoC, the Government votes against it’s own motion, Labour votes for it, a Tory whip imposing a three line whip, votes against it and keeps his job
-
May has lost the trust of parliament, she has lost the control of her cabinet, and she's lost her voice.
This 3rd vote is her last stand, if it fails she'll walk because you can see physically and politically she has no energy to renegotiate a new deal. I didn't think it would ever happen voluntarily but I think she'll resign.
And of course I've just heard some analyst on the radio make the valid point that even in the unlikely event her deal passes, she would also resign.
So she's gone very soon.
-
Remember that in future.
This Govt has just whipped it's party to vote for an approach which it's own analysis says would knock 9% of the GDP of Yorkshire and the Humber.
Utter batshit.
Fortunately, there's still a good few Tories who aren't away with the fairies, and ignored them. Including 4 ministers.
But that in itself shows that the Govt has lost control. This simply does not happen. Ever.
THE most dysfunctional Govt we've ever had. Anyone remember Strong and Stable?
-
Its a staggering contradiction that the brexiteers who want to take back greater parliamentary control from the EU are the same people who have such a dim view of parliamentary procedure and democracy in this country!
-
They've even planned in a MV4. :lol:
-
"Take back control" (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/13/conservatives-britain-no-government-theresa-may-brexit)
"Take back control" (https://newsthump.com/2019/03/12/nation-of-65m-people-to-take-back-control-by-having-fate-decided-by-religious-fundamentalists-only-voted-for-by-290k-of-them/)
"Take back control" (https://external-preview.redd.it/2BGabm7npXZi0WhNB5nBvaF0XeUX17ek-K6VVtXQb8U.jpg?auto=webp&s=f9e9eebb10d6419d630a32e6209bf5223093e8af)
-
Looks like there WILL be another vote on May's Deal next week.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1105928876436480002?p=v
It’s just ridiculous, how many votes is it going to take?
What was it somebody was saying about keeping voting until they get the result they want?
-
She's a stubborn old so-and-so isn't she? She's going to use the line to the hard-Brexiters that today's vote means it's her deal or No Brexit. Which is wrong, of course, but that what she's going to try.
But she's also divorced from reality if she thinks the DUP are going to vote for a deal that puts NI in a different constitutional position to GB.
Mind, she DID take on a NI Secretary who didn't seem to have heard about the sectarian frictions in NI, so maybe the PM herself doesn't understand how deep those feelings go.
Plus, I suspect there'll be a good few ERG members who will be rubbing their hands at the thought of having Brexit snatched out of their hands. It is ideal for their real agenda, of taking control of the Tory party. Those in on that project are not going to cave in because the moderate wing of the party has worked to take away Hard Brexit. It is precisely what they WANT to happen.
-
Struggling to understand the logic of the Maypole now.
The EU will only agree an extension for a valid reason.
Here is Tusk explaining:
"The EU27 will expect a credible justification for a possible extension and its duration.
The smooth functioning of the EU institutions will need to be ensured".
All 27 have to agree to extend.
No proper reason is given by the UK, as no change is proposed.
Problem no 2.
May cannot bring back the May deal unaltered without breaching the rules.
The Speaker should rule her out of order.
Even if there was an extension up to the EU elections, there is no time to set up Ref2 or a GE, and pass legislation to enable the process to progress.
She has run out of road......and so has the UK parliamentary system!
-
To take no deal off the table (although we could still leave without a deal) is one of the most shameful and idiotic moments in our countries history. Its madness, the EU (spit) must be pissing themselves at the moment.
Remainers, just take a few minutes to think about it before jumping down my throat.
The next couple of weeks are vitaly important.
-
"Take back control" (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/13/conservatives-britain-no-government-theresa-may-brexit)
"Take back control" (https://newsthump.com/2019/03/12/nation-of-65m-people-to-take-back-control-by-having-fate-decided-by-religious-fundamentalists-only-voted-for-by-290k-of-them/)
"Take back control" (https://external-preview.redd.it/2BGabm7npXZi0WhNB5nBvaF0XeUX17ek-K6VVtXQb8U.jpg?auto=webp&s=f9e9eebb10d6419d630a32e6209bf5223093e8af)
Strong and stable Government x 1000 (repeat ad infinitum - oops did not work)
We must deliver on the Will of the British people (800 times + JUST in Parliament)
We will be leaving on March 29th 2019 (probably said as many times as the one above)
People are just saying to me on the Doorstep "just get on wiith it"
My Deal delivers on the Will of the British people
My Deal is the ONLY way to ensure No Deal is taken off the table
I will go to the EU and get more changes made to the Backstop
I am back from Brussels with IMPROVED legally binding changes to the Backstop
Repeat them all again and again (and you have) and you will lose your Voice
Never mind we will try my Deal again (till we get enough people voting for what they deplore in order to avoid what they deplore even more) . They were queuing up to say as much last night .
What a state to be in
-
To take no deal off the table (although we could still leave without a deal) is one of the most shameful and idiotic moments in our countries history. Its madness, the EU (spit) must be pissing themselves at the moment.
Remainers, just take a few minutes to think about it before jumping down my throat.
The next couple of weeks are vitaly important.
The last years from 1976 were vitally importantl but the Tory Party MPs would not leave alone the Will of the British people (then 66 34 Remain)
However the time from when Cameron caved in till the minute you and I went into the Ballot Booth was arguably more vitally important - and was wasted in a series of lies damn lies and statistics (on both sides)
-
To take no deal off the table (although we could still leave without a deal) is one of the most shameful and idiotic moments in our countries history. Its madness, the EU (spit) must be pissing themselves at the moment.
Remainers, just take a few minutes to think about it before jumping down my throat.
The next couple of weeks are vitaly important.
It's entirely sensible. For the following three reasons.
1) No Deal was NEVER a remotely credible position to threaten the EU with. Saying "Give us what we want or we'll shoot off our own kneecaps and you'll get splattered with bits of blood and bone" is not a serious negotiating position. It's petulant immaturity. No Govt is ever going to voluntarily choose to do something that would cost their country £1trn over the next decade. Anyone saying this is a credible negotiating stance is either an idiot, or taking you for an idiot.
2) The EU is NOT going to back down on the backstop in any case, and they are 100% correct not to do so. For all the reasons that have been set out here before. So even if the No Deal threat WAS credible, the damage that would do to the EU is less than the damage that would happen due to them backing down on the backstop.
3) The REAL danger was that we would f**k up and stumble into No Deal, which would be the biggest Govt failure since 1914. Yesterday ensured that won't happen.
3)
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
I'm proud to be working class. I never went to university as we couldn't afford anything like that, but it never stopped me picking up a book to widen my knowledge. The middle classes really get up my wick looking down their nose at Mr Average when most of what they have is handed down by mummy and daddy.
But you side with Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage?
And?
-
To take no deal off the table (although we could still leave without a deal) is one of the most shameful and idiotic moments in our countries history. Its madness, the EU (spit) must be pissing themselves at the moment.
Remainers, just take a few minutes to think about it before jumping down my throat.
The next couple of weeks are vitaly important.
I think the result of the referendum is the stupidest moment in this country's history but I got told to 'suck it up'. Perhaps you were one of those saying it.
-
He's basically saying poorer working class people have less intelligence than more affluent middle class people.
The irony is that on another thread, he would argue against this.
Typical remoaner, twisting the facts to suit their weak and failing viewpoints.
I'm proud to be working class. I never went to university as we couldn't afford anything like that, but it never stopped me picking up a book to widen my knowledge. The middle classes really get up my wick looking down their nose at Mr Average when most of what they have is handed down by mummy and daddy.
But you side with Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage?
And?
Well I WOULD spell it out but I think you'd accuse me of being condescending.
A hint. Have a read what you wrote about middle classes helped by mummy and daddy.
-
Are you two Russian bots?
No. Just normal voters who would like to see the traitors in parliament carry out the will of the people rather than fulfil their own agenda.
How do we know the will of the people hasn't changed in two years? MPs changed their minds in the space of a few weeks, so who says that 4% lead hasn't changed in over 2 years? And before you say do we keep just having vote after vote, Theresa has had vote after vote and it'll break the impasse. There is a majority against No Deal and we will see it tonight. No sensible person wants us to actually leave with no deal, they just want it on the table as a bargaining chip.
It interesting that on this forum which most of it's members are based in a very pro Brexit area are mainly remainers, however most of my mates in London which was a remain area are the polar opposite and are very much staunch Brexit.
What this situation clearly shows is that many MPs are totally out of touch with their constituents and come the day of the next election supporters of all parties/Brexit or remain opinion should remember if their MP acted in their interests.
There's a correlation between intelligence and whether you voted Brexit. People on here who can string two sentences together more than likely voted/want to remain. The people that can't spell their own name and aren't on here more than likely voted to leave. The education in our area had clearly let us down over the years.
I fundamentally disagree with this really poor generic statement, which is half the reason we're in the bloody mess we're in....
-
The way I see it, the EU will allow a short extension, up to 3 months, to allow tidying up. Or they will allow a long extension, 18 months to 2 years, to allow a General Election and/or a Second Referendum. They won't move on the Withdrawal Agreement, but they might on the Political Declaration. The latter presents Labour with an opportunity to push their BINO plan.
One thing is certain: No-one, Leave or Remain, will ever trust a politician again.
-
It looks like one of the amendments tabled for tonight's extension vote will call for another Referendum. I hope the Speaker accepts it because it will show how little support there is in the HoC for another public vote.
-
The way I see it, the EU will allow a short extension, up to 3 months, to allow tidying up. Or they will allow a long extension, 18 months to 2 years, to allow a General Election and/or a Second Referendum. They won't move on the Withdrawal Agreement, but they might on the Political Declaration. The latter presents Labour with an opportunity to push their BINO plan.
One thing is certain: No-one, Leave or Remain, will ever trust a politician again.
Surely if it was only 3 month we'd be in the same position as we are now? Nothing would get through.
-
The way I see it, the EU will allow a short extension, up to 3 months, to allow tidying up. Or they will allow a long extension, 18 months to 2 years, to allow a General Election and/or a Second Referendum. They won't move on the Withdrawal Agreement, but they might on the Political Declaration. The latter presents Labour with an opportunity to push their BINO plan.
One thing is certain: No-one, Leave or Remain, will ever trust a politician again.
Surely if it was only 3 month we'd be in the same position as we are now? Nothing would get through.
I think you're right. A 3-month extension without a Deal being in place is merely more can-kicking. I can't see the EU wearing it. They will offer a lengthy extension on the condition of a General Election and/ or a Referendum.
-
The Peoples' Vote campaign has called for the Referendum amendment to be pulled. Labour is whipping MPs to abstain. So we won't find out how strong (or not) the feeling in the HoC is for another public vote.
-
Why've they done this then? In case it dies on its arse and kills the campaign?
-
Interesting from Billy Bragg.
https://mobile.twitter.com/billybragg/status/1106201400961314816?p=v
-
Why've they done this then? In case it dies on its arse and kills the campaign?
Pretty much yes, I think they would get 200 MPs to back it. From Labour's point of view if they allowed their MPs a vote it would show they were all over the place.
-
Wow, do people still actually think there will be a second peoples vote?
-
They don't want one, Corbyn never has and never will.
-
Labour members want one - so Corbyn is going to get one whether likes it or not.
-
334 votes against the Referendum Amendment. That's more than half the HoC.
-
Nevertheless, the Brexit lies are undeliverable and the People's Vote is coming.
-
The EU won't agree to an extension.
I think no deal is still a very real possibility.
-
We will leave with Mays deal on 29th. Watch the news
-
More Labour MP's than Tory MP's voted for the govs' own motion tonight! And more Tories voted against it than for it. Wow!
-
This to me is just madness
Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay voted against the government's motion on delaying Brexit tonight, despite having commended it to MPs less than an hour-and-a-half earlier.
At the end of the debate, preceding tonight's votes, Barclay told MPs: "It is time for this House to act in the national interest. It is time to put forward an extension that is realistic. I commend the government motion to the House."
He then voted against it.
-
We will leave with Mays deal on 29th. Watch the news
Highly likely, I think. It will be last minute stuff though.
-
Flint and Mann were also among six Labour MPs who voted against the Benn amendment that would have given parliament further control of the Brexit process.
This is the amendment which was lost by 2 votes.
Why are they in the Labour Party?
-
Flint and Mann were also among six Labour MPs who voted against the Benn amendment that would have given parliament further control of the Brexit process.
This is the amendment which was lost by 2 votes.
Why are they in the Labour Party?
Because it's a broad church allowing all variety of rules (when it suits them like every party).
-
It is indeed a broad church.
And a forgiving one.
Jeremy Corbyn, for example, voted against the Labour whip 617 times between 1983 and 2015.
-
More Labour MP's than Tory MP's voted for the govs' own motion tonight! And more Tories voted against it than for it. Wow!
I am sure I am not the only person who has lost track of the twists and turns. A couple of nights ago Tory MPs were queuing up to slate "the Deal" saying how bad it was , how it would be detrimental to x,y and z BUT how they would vote for it to to get B****t over the line in any way shape or form.
The DUP are"taking their time" to come to a conclusion - maybe to allow another Billion quid to drop their way - but how can they look at themselves in the mirror having been VEHEMENT opponents of "the Deal"
for as long as it was mooted
In fact I have been an avid viewer for the past few months but I now give it a miss - Parliament is a laughing stock imo and what irks is that when we Leave I expect it will be such a relief that nobody will hold them to account for the outrageous behaviour of both camps in the past 3 years
Government of the people, by the people and for the people ? Dont make me laugh
-
DW, part of that is the choice between deal or no deal.
I don't think the deal goes through as there are enough Tories to prevent it and with the opposition all saying no TM needs all of her party to back it. Even if some move, enough won't.
BST, I have no real issue with members opposing the party line, that takes more guts than doing what you're told as much as it is against political convention.
-
BFYP.
To some extent I agree with you. But without a degree of party discipline, Parliament becomes unmanageable and dysfunctional, as we've seen (predominantly from the Tories) for the past two months.
My point is that Corbyn has made a career out of putting his own opinion above that of the collective party decision. He has zero moral authority to criticise anyone who does not follow the whip.
-
Talking of moral’s, has anyone in the HoC got any?
-
Id guess at about 10% of the MPs have
-
I have no problem with people voting against the whip on a matter of conscience.
The issue here is that the Benn amendment aimed to take control from the failing May government and give it to Parliament.
By doing so, it hoped to move the debate forward on a cross party basis.
In opposing the amendment, the likes of Mann and Flint and the other 4 are saying that they support the May government in their approach.
They presumably believe that forcing a last minute showdown between no deal and the May proposal is in the national interest.
If you believe the executive should be accountable to the HoC, and that Parliament should be able to over-ride poor decision making and inertia, that needs to be asserted.
If you don't believe that, then what is the point of being an opposition MP?
-
... and now it looks like the DUP are going to be offered even more Money to support the "deal"
They already got a load to support the Tories to form and stay in a minority Givt but despite their outrage at the Backstop and the Border in the Irish Sea AND the possibility of return of the troubles it seems that they will take the money *
* That could have been mending potholes - recruiting more Police - funding the NHS to provide Drugs Nurses and Doctors but NO . Austerity ? Dont get me started
-
Theresa to go down as the worst PM ever?
-
No, Cameron put us in this mess, May is probably number two, but whichever Tory followed him had an impossible job. Not excusing May, she is poor.
-
Over to speaker John Bercow;
https://news.sky.com/story/an-ancient-rule-means-bercow-could-take-drastic-action-on-brexit-11664555
Rules eh!
-
It would be great if he intervened - as long as he did it within the rules of precedent which are clearly there when you read the article above
He would get "slaughtered" but surely he would be acting more honourably than May offering the DUP even more money to support her third and maybe 4th attemps and THEM (the DUP) for even considering taking it
One thing that I would not blame the DUP for is to take the money and then abstain / vote against MV3 - I would probably die laughing
-
I see Nigel's Protest March is going well then.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1106882125574402049
-
I see Nigel's Protest March is going well then.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1106882125574402049
They're not marching all the way. They're cgoing to be transported during the night ie they're going to start each day miles ahead of where they finish the day before.
And despite Nigel promises of marching the whole thing he's not even going to be doing more than photo ops with the real marchers before going off to count their donations. I do hope someone is going to record exactly how far he walks!
-
Aye.
Old Nige eh?
He talks the talk but...
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
Try telling that to TM. She's put her deal forward for Parliament to vote on twice, (in a matter of weeks), and it's been defeated twice - yet she intends to put it forward AGAIN next week! Oh, and Parliament knew what they were voting for - you didn't when you voted Leave!
What's good for the goose eh?
-
I see Nigel's Protest March is going well then.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1106882125574402049
They're not marching all the way. They're cgoing to be transported during the night ie they're going to start each day miles ahead of where they finish the day before.
And despite Nigel promises of marching the whole thing he's not even going to be doing more than photo ops with the real marchers before going off to count their donations. I do hope someone is going to record exactly how far he walks!
So what you're saying is it's a bit of a mess, no one really knows what they're doing, it's built on lies, and Nigel Farage f**ks off long before it's done. Sounds familiar.
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
True and you may have seen me post this before on here
A vote is a vote is a vote - so what happened in 1976 ? 66% voted Remain 34 % voted Leave. Thats a 10 times bigger majority than 2016
The Tory euro sceptics never respected it and their spawn are still at it 40 years later
So is that a vote you accept whether you voted for Leave or Remain ?
-
You remember when folk have said that if The Will of The People is not carried out, there'll be riots?
I think they are forgetting that we're British.
This is how Nigel's current attempt at a Mussolini-style March On London is going.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1107214750532947968
And if course, coward and charlatan that he is, he's f**ked off and washed his hands of it.
-
The first civil rights march in history to be campaigning for higher unemployment and poorer working conditions.
Still looks a better day for it....
-
You remember when folk have said that if The Will of The People is not carried out, there'll be riots?
I think they are forgetting that we're British.
This is how Nigel's current attempt at a Mussolini-style March On London is going.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1107214750532947968
And if course, coward and charlatan that he is, he's f**ked off and washed his hands of it.
I bet he doesn't give them their money back!
-
Brexit: ''Not too late for real change to PM's deal'' - Johnson
He's always had a tenuous grip on reality.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47607186
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/woodgnomology/status/1107245529568813058
So why IS Labour MP Kate Hoey supporting Brexit?
-
Absolutely shocking..
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/54516037_2296730213915115_4759558108886335488_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=d99b2cb2c236ae050e3a8c90786d19af&oe=5D020896
-
Absolutely shocking..
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/54516037_2296730213915115_4759558108886335488_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=d99b2cb2c236ae050e3a8c90786d19af&oe=5D020896
What does it say? looks dodgy as f**k, that link. :laugh:
-
it's a link to Ian Lucas Mp Twitter page were he answers a question put to him by one of his constituents.The links fine and safe by the way..
-
Absolutely shocking..
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/54516037_2296730213915115_4759558108886335488_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr3-1.xx&oh=d99b2cb2c236ae050e3a8c90786d19af&oe=5D020896
Lucas is being stupidly blunt but he is technically correct.
We elect MPs to study, debate and decide on complex issues that we don't have the time, ability or interest in doing. If we don't like the decisions they take, we can vote them out.
It's a stupid concept that MPs are supposed to "represent" the 100,000 citizens in their constituency. How are they supposed to know what all those people think, whether their constituents are informed fully etc, etc.
PS. I said Lucas was stupidly blunt. But it's perhaps understandable.
This is what MPs are having to deal with at the moment. https://mobile.twitter.com/IanCLucas/status/1106934560426733568
-
I get what you are saying Billy but once again it's another case of total detachment the country feels as regard it MP's..I would have posted that whether it was a Labour,Tory,Liberal or independent Mp who reacted to it..
Wrexham is as safe a Labour seat as you are going to get,but the hundreds of comments on social media are mainly coming from Labour voters who are upset with it and how he voted.Wrexham was 60% leave 40% remain..
Taking Politics as a whole right now each main Party has both split into two..The Tory's have both the traditional conservative centre right and the ERG hard right and Labour has the same problem in reverse with momentum and the hard left as opposed to the majority of centre left mp's..You could argue a good case right now that there should be 4 party's plus the rest...
-
WingCo
This isn't a personal slight, but I do get pissed off with people quoting incorrect facts that can be checked in 5 seconds.
Lucas's majority is 1,800. If his constituency is strongly pro-Brexit it would be far more in his interests to be pro-Brexit.
There's no excuse for building up an argument based on "facts" that aren't facts. We've all got a duty to do better than that.
-
And facts can be taken in many different ways Billy which again without any disrespect is something your guilty of on occasions to suit your view,we all do it..I could counter that argument though by saying that Wrexham has been a Labour seat in every election since 1935 unless I'm mistaken..Thats 20 odd elections in a row.
However whether it was Labour or Conservative is immaterial, that was irrelevant to the point regardless of Political affiliation..The fact still remains that both Party's are totally disenfranchised from the British Public,..If there was a GE next week you would probably see the lowest turnout in history...
-
Dare Mr Speaker finish this Speech off by disallowing MV 3 ? Hes building up to it !
-
it's a link to Ian Lucas Mp Twitter page were he answers a question put to him by one of his constituents.The links fine and safe by the way..
BTW It's not a link to a twitter page. It's a link to a "screenshot" that looks like it was photoshopped. A quick visit to both the MP's actually twitter page (https://twitter.com/IanCLucas) and the twitter page of the person who asked the question (https://twitter.com/Stella020612) and you can't find any reference to the "you thought wrong" comment. Just saying.
-
Dare Mr Speaker finish this Speech off by disallowing MV 3 ? Hes building up to it !
Thats a big shout ! Good for him
May must change the Deal fundamentally or she cant bring it back !
-
it's a link to Ian Lucas Mp Twitter page were he answers a question put to him by one of his constituents.The links fine and safe by the way..
BTW It's not a link to a twitter page. It's a link to a "screenshot" that looks like it was photoshopped. A quick visit to both the MP's actually twitter page (https://twitter.com/IanCLucas) and the twitter page of the person who asked the question (https://twitter.com/Stella020612) and you can't find any reference to the "you thought wrong" comment. Just saying.
Well I've just gone on his twitter page scrolled down and found it mate,its still on there..March 15th..Along with 609 angry reply's
-
Dare Mr Speaker finish this Speech off by disallowing MV 3 ? Hes building up to it !
Thats a big shout ! Good for him
May must change the Deal fundamentally or she cant bring it back !
It's an interesting decision from someone who divides opinion. Seems fair enough on the face of it unless you have the proposition of the vote being passed but not getting through. It seems to disregard that other circumstances can lead to a change in result without the proposition being changed.
Our politics is very, very strange....
-
Rees-Mogg asking if the same deal can be put before a new parliament - ie, after a general election. The little tinker!
E: Jumped the gun, I didn't consider government could actually prorogue a new parliamentary session outside of normal procedure. Which would certainly be an interesting take on the whole democracy thing, to say the least.
-
Rees-Mogg asking if the same deal can be put before a new parliament - ie, after a general election. The little tinker!
Do you think he's dropping a rather large hint to Jeremy Corbyn? :lol:
-
Dare Mr Speaker finish this Speech off by disallowing MV 3 ? Hes building up to it !
Thats a big shout ! Good for him
May must change the Deal fundamentally or she cant bring it back !
It's an interesting decision from someone who divides opinion. Seems fair enough on the face of it unless you have the proposition of the vote being passed but not getting through. It seems to disregard that other circumstances can lead to a change in result without the proposition being changed.
Our politics is very, very strange....
It's not strange at all, it's based on Erskine May, which has laid down the rules that apply to Parliamentary business for nearly 200 years.
-
Dare Mr Speaker finish this Speech off by disallowing MV 3 ? Hes building up to it !
Thats a big shout ! Good for him
May must change the Deal fundamentally or she cant bring it back !
It's an interesting decision from someone who divides opinion. Seems fair enough on the face of it unless you have the proposition of the vote being passed but not getting through. It seems to disregard that other circumstances can lead to a change in result without the proposition being changed.
Our politics is very, very strange....
It's a interesting point..it would have been interesting to see how much closer the vote would have been, but doesn't that rule out a second peoples vote based on voting for the same thing twice..??
On second thoughts don't answer that I know what some would say..lol. Not a surprise this, Bercow of course has been accused a number of times for picking resolutions and amendments to suit his own personal agenda..However on this occasion I believe he is correct on this ruling..
-
The intriguing thing was the delay motion was passed pending further action - if the speaker now doesn't allow that action does that motion apply? Messy!
Interesting on Glyn's point - surely he's just said you can't bring the same thing twice so Corbyn's hands are tied?
-
The intriguing thing was the delay motion was passed pending further action - if the speaker now doesn't allow that action does that motion apply? Messy!
Interesting on Glyn's point - surely he's just said you can't bring the same thing twice so Corbyn's hands are tied?
Corbyn's hands are tied about what?
EDIT If you're talking about a Vote Of Confidence, no it's not the same - the WA is legislation as part of the EU Withdrawal Act. A Vote Of Confidence isn't legislation, it's a censure motion and can be held at any time.
-
The intriguing thing was the delay motion was passed pending further action - if the speaker now doesn't allow that action does that motion apply? Messy!
Interesting on Glyn's point - surely he's just said you can't bring the same thing twice so Corbyn's hands are tied?
Corbyn's hands are tied about what?
EDIT If you're talking about a Vote Of Confidence, no it's not the same - the WA is legislation as part of the EU Withdrawal Act. A Vote Of Confidence isn't legislation, it's a censure motion and can be held at any time.
An interesting inconsistency wouldn't you say? Just think that is bizarre.
The bizarre part of this, May cannot under this try to move the same deal yet the EU say they don't want to change the deal and aren't keen on an extension without something concrete.....
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
And in the meantime 17.4m people who voted to leave are thinking what?
I'm not a Corbyn fan but I'm tending to think a general election may well be the best thing....
-
It'll only return the tories.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
And in the meantime 17.4m people who voted to leave are thinking what?
I'm not a Corbyn fan but I'm tending to think a general election may well be the best thing....
Probably thinking 'But we were told when we voted that we held all the cards but now you're telling us we've only got a pair of twos?'
-
We will leave with Mays deal on 29th. Watch the news
Ahem. You were saying?
-
Imagine being a Tory today and being told to follow the rules, the cincept must be alien to them 😀
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
-
WingCo
Accepted that Wrexham has historically been a Labour seat, but circumstances change. The fact is that it's currently a marginal. Labour's majority has reduced for the past 5 elections in a row and it's now in the 20 top Tory target Labour seats.
The specific point is that it's clearly not in Lucas's personal interests to vote against Brexit. The wider point is that accusing MPs of acting selfishly is frequently wrong. Some do. Most don't.
If I appear to twist facts to make a point, please point it out to me. I try very hard not to do so because these issues are too important to do that. The aim of all of us should be to start with facts and draw conclusions from them, not the other way round.
-
Who'd have thought it? This Govt being so incompetent as to not even check what is allowable in Parliament before acting.
-
By the way WingCo.
If you think that an MP, brusquely (and, yeah, I'll agree, unpleasantly) pointing out a fact about our Constitution) is shocking, I assume you are apoplectic about the MPs who said these things during the referendum campaign about the Single Market, and now insist that the Will of The People is that we leave the Single Market.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D0xGt3QmRSZY&ved=2ahUKEwjuzen2r4zhAhXfWxUIHZ3wCMUQwqsBMAN6BAgKEA4&usg=AOvVaw0v2iTLsDSrd_kHuzccm72b&cshid=1552936203640
Me, I think it's an affront to the entire democratic process. And I'd say the same thing regardless of what party politicians belonged to if they mislead voters to that extent.
-
This is better than Coronation Street. I'm hoping there's a GE coming up and the Independent Party and Lib Dems make gains. Then Conservatives struggle again to gain a majority.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
So all the people who live in Gibraltar and work in Spain, what about them? What about all the British citizens living in the EU? What about all the EU citizens living in the UK? No deal means all of those lives are messed up.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
If that happens (and I won't) I guarantee you that the next day, Parliament will vote to revoke A50.
But you carry on with your ridiculous Brexiters fantasies.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
Did you miss the 5 letter bombs last week? Or did you just think they were a joke?
When the next mainland bombing campaign starts up and someone asks you who started it don't forget to say 'I did'.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
If that happens (and I won't) I guarantee you that the next day, Parliament will vote to revoke A50.
But you carry on with your ridiculous Brexiters fantasies.
Wow, you think parliament will rovoke article 50?
They've just very very narrowly voted against leaving without a deal.
My god, your deluded if you think that would ever happen. Hilarious.
Just pause and think about the ramifications of revoking article 50.
Your living in cloud cookoo land.
-
The EU are sitting pretty now..With all member states having to agree I cant see them going for anything other than a nice long delay,forcing us to stand in the eu elections and tieing us down to a second referendum..Right now we cant give them a reason as they have requested ,to say how a short delay will resolve this..
They hold a full house while we are holding a pair of deuces..
.... and maybe worse
France - we want to access your fishing grounds
Spain - we want Gibraltar
Germany - we want you to admit that Ball was not over the line in 66
Greece - we want the Elgin Marbles back
ROI - we want Northern Ireland
any more ?
I'd imagine they'll start with "we want you to tell us what the f**ks going on".
Which is why it would be better to leave without a deal.
No matter though, Italy and Hungary will veto any extension and save our skin.
Did you miss the 5 letter bombs last week? Or did you just think they were a joke?
When the next mainland bombing campaign starts up and someone asks you who started it don't forget to say 'I did'.
You've lost me there.......
-
BS
The vote to rule out No Deal in all circumstances was passed by a majority of 43.
I'm telling you. If Farage and his bunch of treasonous bas**rds (scuttling round Europe cooking up plans with others who are paid for by Putin) DID manage to convince the neo-fascists in La Lega and Fidesz to veto an extension of A50, Parliament would immediately revoke A50. For the simple reason that if they didn't, in two weeks time, we'd have the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s on our hands.
But it won't come to that because Farage, for all his bluster, is a busted flush.
He might want to help his ally, Putin in putting us back to the days of the Jarrow Marchers, but he can't even organise that sort of event.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1107740598453325829
-
Of course, if Farage DID manage to conspire with foreign Govts to act in a way that is prejudicial to the expressed intention of our sovereign body, he would be guilty of treason. For the second time. The first one being when his organisation accepted £8m from the Kremlin to spew out filth and lies during the 2016 campaign.
Fascinating that the people who are SO concerned with us taking back control from a foreign power don't seem to give two shits about that. It's almost as if all they are interested in is winning at all costs.
-
I have a feeling that next week the EU (which doesn't show any signs of a breaking of collective ranks) will say that the UK can have an extension of up to 2 years. But we will be required to hold a General Election and / or a Referendum.
Given there's no consensus in Parliament for another Referendum, I now think a General Election is quite likely.
-
TRB
The EU cannot require us to do any such thing.
What they can and absolutely SHOULD do is require our Govt to have a clear strategy for what it is going to do with the delay, so that we don't end up in the same shit show in 1, 3, 6, 12 or 24 months time.
If the Govt decides that it can't do that without a Ref2 or a GE, that is entirely the Govt's choice.
Equally, the Govt could choose to rescind A50. What it can't do is to decide to crash out with No Deal, because Parliament has instructed it not to do so in any circumstances.
Be clear about this, because the nutter Right will start the lies very soon. Whatever we do after May goes to Brussels will be OUR decision. WE have brought this f**king mess on ourselves. None of it is the fault of the EU.
-
The EU may not make an explicit demand, but I expect they will want to know from May what ideas she has for breaking the log jam. Now her preferred strategy of trying to slowly grind down opposition to her deal has failed.
A General Election, especially if it were to be held with the Tories having chosen a new leader might just shift the numbers enough to get the original (May) deal through. Or whoever becomes PM might want to propose a different approach. The next PM might favour another referendum and might have the numbers to do it.
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Either option seems more likely to produce a solution than trying to get a consensus on anything from this Parliament.
-
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Now there's something I could vote for!
-
https://youtu.be/X_iFtHnLPXQ
-
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Now there's something I could vote for!
Some typos are better than others! LOL!
-
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Now there's something I could vote for!
That WOULD be a divisive referendum...
-
TRB
The EU cannot require us to do any such thing.
What they can and absolutely SHOULD do is require our Govt to have a clear strategy for what it is going to do with the delay, so that we don't end up in the same shit show in 1, 3, 6, 12 or 24 months time.
If the Govt decides that it can't do that without a Ref2 or a GE, that is entirely the Govt's choice.
Equally, the Govt could choose to rescind A50. What it can't do is to decide to crash out with No Deal, because Parliament has instructed it not to do so in any circumstances.
Be clear about this, because the nutter Right will start the lies very soon. Whatever we do after May goes to Brussels will be OUR decision. WE have brought this f**king mess on ourselves. None of it is the fault of the EU.
We can leave without a deal, that vote wasn't legally binding.
If the one of the EU countries veto any extension to article 50 then it probably will happen.
What's more likely is they vote for mays deal, and tell bercow to do one.
I understand what yiyr saying is what you want to happen in that circumstance, but in reality it won't.
-
I see you're one of these "Take Back Control" wags who interpret that to mean "drive a coach and horses through our democratic processes."
If the Govt ignored a vote by Parliament on such a historically important issue, you're into the biggest constitutional crisis of all time, because you'd have a Govt deliberately going against the will of the Sovereign body of the country. The Government rules with Parliament's consent. The Speaker is there to see that all sides operate according to established precedent. The Govt isn't some omnipotent dictator that can ram through whatever actions it wishes. That system has served us well for centuries. You seem to think it's dispensible. Fascinating. I don't recall that being on the ballot paper in 2016.
As for any EU country blocking an extension of A50 and thereby wrecking the policy established by our Parliament, I assume that you, great patriot that you are, would be infuriated by that, and would demand answers from any British national who'd helped facilitate it?
Or doesn't it matter as long as you can troll the libs?
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
-
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Now there's something I could vote for!
That WOULD be a divisive referendum...
To be fair we could try each for 5 years to see which works best !
-
Or May could grab the spirit of the proposed Kyle / Wilson amendment (which won't happen now that MV3 won't happen) and propose a Referendum of her dead vs. Remain.
Now there's something I could vote for!
That WOULD be a divisive referendum...
To be fair we could try each for 5 years to see which works best !
I think if we did that, Father Time would take the decision for us...
-
Our leaving the EU Minister says " Bercow has decided that the Deal cant come back to Parliament based on a precedent set in 1604"
However there have been such rulings since BUT he failed to mention that most people when their Bills get voted down do not have the "brass neck" to try them again EVEN if they have lost by just 1 vote rather than it getting hammered twice *
* I said twice even though technically it is only once as the Speaker ruled that the Second attempt to get it passed was fundamentally different from the first. Very generous of him
-
BS.
I'm saying that the Govt doesn't have the right to ride roughshod over the opinion of Parliament. Not practically. Not morally. Not constitutionally. Full stop.
Parliament has not, by the way, done anything to stop Brexit. It has simply blocked two specific forms of Brexit. Neither of which has ever had anything remotely approaching majority support in the general population in poll after poll after poll. I fail to see why that is a democratic outrage.
Now, if the 2016 vote had come out in favour of a defined and specific form of Brexit, and Parliament rejected that, then yes, I'd entirely agree that that would be a very, very bad thing for our democracy. But the 2016 vote didn't specify that, did it. In fact, last night I posted a video from 2016 with many prominent Leave supporters stating explicitly that we could have a firm of Brexit which every one of them now says would be a betrayal.
Hey! Here's a thought! Now that we all know a lot more about the intricacies of the different forms of Brexit, and the pros and cons of each of them, why don't we have another referendum, with multiple options and transferrable votes? Then we can REALLY find out what The Will of The People is.
Can't think why anyone would be against that.
-
In principal I wouldn't be against that but for me it would have to be 2 votes,the first to see if we remain or stay and if its still leave the second on the different options of brexit which Parliament have to proceed with...
I'm not sure how you can do it in one vote.You cant have Remain,Soft brexit,Hard Brexit,no deal brexit on the same paper as the leave option will be diluted away...
-
Not really. If you'd prefer a no deal but put hard Brexit as second choice then they'd get some of that vote too for example.
-
WingCo.
But that's a flawed process.
The first vote you suggest would have the same flaw as the 2016 vote. It lumps together everyone whose first preference is a specific form of Brexit as having their second choice being ANY form of Brexit. It assumes that someone who wants a very soft, Norway-style Brexit as preferring No Deal to Remain as their second choice. In reality, there would be people who would like a Norway deal ideally, but would reluctantly support Remain rather than a very Hard Brexit.
That's PRECISELY the problem with the 2016 vote. It's because there is ONE thing called Remain, but there is no one thing called Leave . Leave is an umbrella term covering many possible things.
You want proof of that? Farage and many others in 2016 were touting a Norway Brexit. Now the very same people are saying that wouldn't be Brexit at all.
So the ONLY way you can properly do this is to have multiple options in a single vote.
No Deal
May Deal
Norway Deal
Remain.
You rank each one 1-4.
You add up all the first preference votes. If one option gets 50.01%, that wins.
Otherwise you eliminate the choice that comes last, then reallocate all the second choices of the people who voted for that one.
You carry on until an option hits 50.01%
I genuinely cannot see why anyone would not see that as an entirely fair way of really finding out what the country wants.
-
As expected. The EU are gearing up to politely ask May specifically what the f**k we are planning to do, rather than just give us an extension to allow this shit show to barrel on for another few months.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1107933596701114368
-
Wing Co.
As I was saying...
https://mobile.twitter.com/GwynneMP/status/1107741970141798401
Complicated, int it?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Fransfedup/status/1107767663583993859
This sums it up pretty well...
-
Wing Co.
As I was saying...
https://mobile.twitter.com/GwynneMP/status/1107741970141798401
Complicated, int it?
This is the problem either way. On remain it wasn't just remain as is remember, the remain camp had promised and Cameron had agreed changes with the EU already - people seem to forget that bit. Remain didn't just mean carry on, many wanted a change who voted that way and remain meant many things to many people. As does leave clearly. I want us to leave but not on a car crash of a deal and no deal exit. This is the inherent problem, there is not and never will be a majority for one choice in this situation.
-
BFYP
Which is why offering a binary referendum on such a nuanced issue was the biggest strategic mistake by our Govt since Suez. It's why Cameron will sit in the bottom handful of PMs in future lists.
Utter stupidity, done for party political reasons, and it's tipped us into this crisis.
-
Billy you are going to love this..A reply from my local Mp on the subject of brexit when I mailed him..
Brexit - What the flip is going on?
Residents have been emailing to ask what is happening so here goes.
A few weeks ago I posted a clip of me speaking in the House of Commons in which I stated that residents could see there was a stitch up in Parliament taking place to deny the people what they voted for.
The intervention yesterday of our Remain-supporting Speaker was a further example of this. The Speaker, who has prided himself on being a modernising Speaker prepared to dispense with precedent regularly, decided to rely on a ruling from 1604 to prevent the Government getting us out of the EU via the PM's deal at the very point it looked like it was about to gain the required support.
Why is this important and why now?
In short, the reason this was done is because last week the Commons voted to compel the Prime Minister to seek an extension to Brexit. That motion required only a short extension if the PM had secured backing for her deal before next week, and a much longer one if not. By attempting to take her deal off the table altogether, the Speaker has ensured that a very long extension may need to be negotiated, something the Remainers are clamoring for because they feel the longer the delay, the less likely we are to ever get Brexit.
As for the Speaker, he has twice allowed MPs who are opposed to Brexit to move an amendment known as Cooper-Boles, which is a Brexit wrecking amendment. Apparently, the ruling that you can't bring the same issue twice in one parliamentary session is a selective one. The House of Commons voted down a second referendum last week, but I suspect the Speaker will allow that to be brought back too! Indeed, when he selected the amendment on a second referendum last week, he overlooked one signed by members of 3 parties and over 120 MPs, mainly Brexit supporters seeking to rule out a second referendum, in favour of one moved by a narrow group of Remainer MPs - I wonder why?
I say this with no joy. I supported Speaker Bercow when I was elected, I liked his modernising ways, his commitment to defending the rights of backbenchers and I personally found him a supportive Speaker. In recent years he has overstepped the mark in his dealings with members, he is openly offensive to MPs he personally doesn't like or who dare to question him. He clearly dislikes the Government front bench and seems to have committed himself to making life as difficult as possible for the Government - no bad thing sometimes, but not to the point that the Speaker is no longer an independent arbiter of affairs. Moreover, by declaring himself as anti-Brexit, he has broken the centuries old convention that the Chair remains independent. An irony that a man who has broken so many precedents relied on one from 1604 yesterday to try to 'do a job' on Brexit.
Why are we here?
Well, that is partly on the shoulders of Brexiteers. For months I have been warning that the Commons will never allow a no deal Brexit, as confirmed in the huge vote last week against no deal, and that the only way out was via the PM's deal. That deal, remember, only covers an 18 month period and would have gotten us out legally. In heated discussions with fellow Brexiteers in recent months, I have explained to them my view that the Speaker would make leaving as tricky as possible, Parliament would never allow a no deal Brexit and that the Government would not be able to agree on a no deal Brexit either.
The Government may find a way around this ruling, time will tell, but it is evidence of what I warned about.
If it wasn't so sad and depressing, I'd be doing the told you so dance right now. I am not though, as I am disgusted at the stitch-up taking place to deny you, me and nearly 70% of local people the thing it is they voted for in a democratic process! I am genuinely appalled!
-
Genuine question, by revoking article 50 now what is there to stop it being resurrected further down the line? Or is it a case of you only get 1 go?
-
Be a back door extension?
-
Genuine question, by revoking article 50 now what is there to stop it being resurrected further down the line? Or is it a case of you only get 1 go?
No reason why it couldn't be invoked again.
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
To quote your own words back at you:
that vote wasn't legally binding
I'm glad you finally appreciated what that phrase means.
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
To quote your own words back at you:
that vote wasn't legally binding
I'm glad you finally appreciated what that phrase means.
Maybe, let's see what happens if they revoke it then.
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
To quote your own words back at you:
that vote wasn't legally binding
I'm glad you finally appreciated what that phrase means.
Maybe, let's see what happens if they revoke it then.
What'll happen? Brexit will stop, that's what'll happen.
-
It isn't its the minority shouting there mouths of but a vote is a vote is a vote END OF weather you like it or not
True and you may have seen me post this before on here
A vote is a vote is a vote - so what happened in 1976 ? 66% voted Remain 34 % voted Leave. Thats a 10 times bigger majority than 2016
The Tory euro sceptics never respected it and their spawn are still at it 40 years later
So is that a vote you accept whether you voted for Leave or Remain ?
I am going to put my own point of view that many on here will strongly disagree with, as is their absolute right. I am not trying to 'convert' anyone.
After a criminal conviction, if new evidence comes to light an appeal is usually allowed involving a re-trial.
I see similarities here. Since the 2016 referendum much information not widely known at the time has become available. This includes the real pros and cons of Brexit versus remain - all those useful little organisations we will be leaving and the real net financial costs once EU regional and educational benefits are taken into account. The time consuming and non trivial nature of setting up Trade Agreements with other countries. Also now known are irregularities in the leave campaign and possible outside interference. Not least we now all know the real threat to peace in Northern Ireland and the 1998 Good Friday agreement that a hard border would present.
Above all we now have a good idea of what sort of deal is achievable, whereas at the time of the referendum we had absolutely no idea.
For me that is reasonable grounds for a second vote on something we now all know much more about.
Just my opinion - I believe in democracy, but also in pragmatism.
-
Nowt wrong with that for me
a) Very reasonable grounds for a second vote (third I would say but better not quote 76 again)
b) I too believe in democracy (could be improved by PR)
c) Also it would be pragmatic - I mean we simply NEED to solve this soon !
Perhaps Cameron made a second mistake when calling his Referendum by not saying for anything to change the Leave vote must be at least 66% rather than allowing there to be a Vote that could have ended 50.1 v 49.9 and very nearly did
-
Genuine question, by revoking article 50 now what is there to stop it being resurrected further down the line? Or is it a case of you only get 1 go?
No reason why it couldn't be invoked again.
Any country can invoke and rescind A50 whenever it pleases and as often as it pleases.
Whether it's sensible to dick around with the EU like that when our future security and prosperity depends on a grown up and sensible relationship with them is another question altogether.
-
Couldn't agree more Dutch. Very firmly and sensibly put.
The only thing I'd add (and frankly, it beggars belief that neither Corbyn nor May have once raised this) is that the man who put the highest personal political donation of all time into the Leave campaign is currently being investigated by the National Crime Agency, after being referred by the Electoral Commission who found reasonable grounds to believe that he had committed multiple criminal actions in respect of that donation. Specifically, that he broke the law by feeding money into the Leave campaign from non-UK (read: "Russian") sources.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/our-work/roles-and-responsibilities/our-role-as-regulator-of-political-party-finances/sanctions/report-on-investigation-into-payments-made-to-better-for-the-country-and-leave.eu
That alone is an open and shut case for discounting the 2016 vote and re-starting the process.
-
Is that what would have happened as of right BST IF the Referendum had been "binding" or "mandatory"
BUT
because it was only advisory the misbehaviour / crime can be ignored
-
Read this thread.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1107988238118121472
Jesus wept. We're 7 working days from leaving and that void that calls itself PM can't even decide what to ask the EU for an extension.
A career made of non-decisions. Never committing to anything.
She's the political equivalent of Mark Wilson.
-
Dunno Wolf.
What I do know is that in 2016, before the vote, Theresa May as Home Secretary is believed to have vetoed a request by MI6 to be allowed to investigate Arron Banks, due to their suspicions that he was a Russian agent.
She's been asked to confirm or deny this time and time again in the House. Every time she's used a preposterous excuse to avoid answering.
-
EU: Your Parliament has voted to delay Brexit. What length of delay would you like Mrs May? Long or short?
May: Long AND short.
EU: And what do you plan to do during the extension Mrs May, to bring this issue to a close?
May: Strong AND stable.
EU: What sort of deal do you think would be acceptable to your Parliament Mrs May?
May: No Deal is better than a bad deal.
EU: Come on! It's been nearly three years now. You MUST have some idea what Brexit you want?
May: Brexit means Brexit. My mind is going. I can feel it. I learned a little song. Would you like to hear it? Daisy.....Daaaaaiiiiizzzzeeee...giiiiiiivvvvve meeeee yooooooouuuuurrrrr....
-
Dunno Wolf.
What I do know is that in 2016, before the vote, Theresa May as Home Secretary is believed to have vetoed a request by MI6 to be allowed to investigate Arron Banks, due to their suspicions that he was a Russian agent.
She's been asked to confirm or deny this time and time again in the House. Every time she's used a preposterous excuse to avoid answering.
Yes like the accidental Trident Launch that Andrew Marr gave up asking if she had been aware of
Worth looking that one up folks - all she did was say "we are committed to the Trident programme - and all Jeremy Corbyn wants to do is abolish what is our nuclear deterrent system"
On second thoughts dont bother unless you want to see her squirm - as all she does is say 4 times at least what I have captured above
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
To quote your own words back at you:
that vote wasn't legally binding
I'm glad you finally appreciated what that phrase means.
Maybe, let's see what happens if they revoke it then.
What'll happen? Brexit will stop, that's what'll happen.
If that happens, like I said, all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law will go out of the window.
It will really be into the realms of the unknown. But I'm telling you now, the poll tax riots will look like a tea party in comparison. I'm not advocating it, but with the millions that will descend on London to protest, it will almost be inevitable.
-
BS.
Aye. I'm not sure how the security services will cope.
https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1107930970018250753
-
So your saying the government should ignore the will of the people and rekoke article 50?
That would remove all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law.
We really would be in the realms of the unknown.
It certainly isn't a solution.
After all this You've STILL got your remain tinted specs on. It's time to remove them, and think rationally.
To quote your own words back at you:
that vote wasn't legally binding
I'm glad you finally appreciated what that phrase means.
Maybe, let's see what happens if they revoke it then.
What'll happen? Brexit will stop, that's what'll happen.
If that happens, like I said, all semblance of democracy, government and rule of law will go out of the window.
It will really be into the realms of the unknown. But I'm telling you now, the poll tax riots will look like a tea party in comparison. I'm not advocating it, but with the millions that will descend on London to protest, it will almost be inevitable.
Just like there was the complete destruction of democracy and rioting in the streets after Denmark and Ireland ignored a referendum and had a second one? In Ireland's case, twice.
Or are you being just a tad - but very entertainingly so - melodramatic? People won't turn up to a simple pro-Brexit march to London, I very much doubt we'll need soldiers and police with tear gas and riotshields to quell the whole indignant mass of humanity you seem to think there'd be in London.
-
Well, as they say... Wait and see
-
the Care Homes adn't allowed to let them out.
-
Well, as they say... Wait and see
You forgot to twirl your waxed moustache.
-
Given that the average age of Leave voters was about 78, it'll be fun seeing BS leading all these Zimmer frame wielding rioters.
-
On which topic, here's a thought.
Given that it was people who were retired or nearing retirement who were the only age groups to vote on balance for Brexit, here's the logical Govt policy.
Announce that, if Brexit is the success that the old folk claim it will be, the additional wealth the country makes over and above pre-Brexit contributions will ALL be paid out in higher pensions.
Conversely, if we lose money, ALL of that will be accounted for by the Govt imposing taxes on pensioners.
Pensioners wanted Brexit. They can own the consequences.
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
-
Given that the average age of Leave voters was about 78, it'll be fun seeing BS leading all these Zimmer frame wielding rioters.
For a man of your intelligence and intellect Billy, that is a really pathetic, insulting, and disgusting post.
-
What is ageist about what I said? The voting statistics are established facts.
I know folk on the Leave side have often had trouble with the concept of established facts, but they DO exist.
-
Given that the average age of Leave voters was about 78, it'll be fun seeing BS leading all these Zimmer frame wielding rioters.
For a man of your intelligence and intellect Billy, that is a really pathetic, insulting, and disgusting post.
Jesus wept. It was a JOKE. We used to have a lot of them in here.
You get it? The comedic premise? BS is threatening a violent uprising. I responded by ridiculously over-exaggerating the average age of Leave voters to open up the ridiculous vision of millions of old folk rioting in Trafalgar Square.
-
What is ageist about what I said? The voting statistics are established facts.
I know folk on the Leave side have often had trouble with the concept of established facts, but they DO exist.
That's not what I'm talking about and you know it. Go back and look at how you described elderly people. Just for once admit that what you wrote was totally inappropriate.
-
Pfft.
-
OK so Barnier has said that the EU won't grant an extension unless there is a 'new event or political process'.
So what does May do now?
- Talk to Labour re CU/SM
- General Election
- Referendum/confirmatory vote
- wait for the German car industry to come to the rescue
Of course it won't be Barnier's decision - it will be down to the EU 27 leaders - although if Channel 4 news is to be believed, Italy & Hungary are going to veto it anyway.
All going well then...
-
I saw a worrying headline in The Telegraph earlier about ERG members going to Budapest, Warsaw and Prague to encourage their Govts to veto an extension.
Then I saw who the three MPs were.
One was Owen Patterson, who vociferously said in 2016 that only a madman would suggest we leave the Single Market...and who now says we should leave the Single Market. So presumably he's been declared insane over the past three years.
One was Daniel Kawczynski. Here's someone who, even in an era of intellectual pygmies in Parliament, is unmistakable for his spectacular breed of pig-shit-thickness.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/daniel-kawczynski-brexit-marshall-plan-aid-usa-tory-conservative-mp-second-world-war-eu-david-lammy-a8763006.html%3famp
A man so utterly devoid of grey matter that he does just commit treason. He tweets about the fact that he's committed treason.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1087691731095699456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16211117603442784098.ampproject.net%2F1903141753530%2Fframe.html
The other one, I've literally never heard of.
If European leaders can be persuaded by the likes of them, I think I'm going to switch to Leave after all.
-
Given that the average age of Leave voters was about 78, it'll be fun seeing BS leading all these Zimmer frame wielding rioters.
For a man of your intelligence and intellect Billy, that is a really pathetic, insulting, and disgusting post.
Jesus wept. It was a JOKE. We used to have a lot of them in here.
You get it? The comedic premise? BS is threatening a violent uprising. I responded by ridiculously over-exaggerating the average age of Leave voters to open up the ridiculous vision of millions of old folk rioting in Trafalgar Square.
On one hand you claim this a serious matter requiring serious debate, then you make disgusting ageist comments and claim its a joke.
Careful, the 3/4 people that still take your opinion with more than just a pinch of salt on here, will dwindle even further.
-
Pfft.
Grow up
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
Yes, she's my hero.
-
Last snowflake of the winter.
-
BS.
The general discussion IS very serious.
Your farcical comments about your fantasies of mass insurrection however, can only be countered by surreal comedy.
-
Always hilarious how millennials or younger generations are referred to as the snowflakes. This last page...
-
Brexiteers rushing to their next meeting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOOs8MaR1YM
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
He's more likely got a JRM pillow :lol:
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
He's more likely got a JRM pillow :lol:
If he has, after JRM supported Bercow's ruling, he must be biting it in frustration.
-
Well, even by May's standard of "My policy is to get to the end of today", this is rather humiliating.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47636011
Yesterday, No10 announced she would be writing to the EU to ask for a short delay with the option of a long one. Today, after she's been bollocked by the ERG, she's dropped the "long" bit.
-
Well, even by May's standard of "My policy is to get to the end of today", this is rather humiliating.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47636011
Yesterday, No10 announced she would be writing to the EU to ask for a short delay with the option of a long one. Today, after she's been bollocked by the ERG, she's dropped the "long" bit.
Her lack of coherent strategy never fails to amaze.
-
I thought us millennials were the snowflakes?
-
Government is collapsing about us.
Less that a week ago, the Cabinet Secretary said this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1108273373946236928
A short extension to A50 would be reckless.
Today, May is writing to the EU specifically to ask for that.
-
Government is collapsing about us.
Less that a week ago, the Cabinet Secretary said this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1108273373946236928
A short extension to A50 would be reckless.
Today, May is writing to the EU specifically to ask for that.
Youve spent this entire thread moaning about what's going on, but said very little about how you feesably think the government should proceed.
Pure waffle, piffle and flannel being spouted by desparate remoaners.
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
He's more likely got a JRM pillow :lol:
If he has, after JRM supported Bercow's ruling, he must be biting it in frustration.
Wow, you really don't understand what's going on do you 🤦♂️
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
He's more likely got a JRM pillow :lol:
If he has, after JRM supported Bercow's ruling, he must be biting it in frustration.
Wow, you really don't understand what's going on do you 🤦♂️
The irony is absolutely mindblowing.
-
I thought us millennials were the snowflakes?
When snowflakes are picked up on not practising what they preach they tend to defend themselves by accusing their accusers of being snowflakes themselves. It's a sort of defence mechanism they deploy that only fellow snowflakes think is a reasonable response.
-
Government is collapsing about us.
Less that a week ago, the Cabinet Secretary said this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1108273373946236928
A short extension to A50 would be reckless.
Today, May is writing to the EU specifically to ask for that.
Youve spent this entire thread moaning about what's going on, but said very little about how you feesably think the government should proceed.
Pure waffle, piffle and flannel being spouted by desparate remoaners.
How can anybody advise a government how to proceed when it's taken two years to kick a can to end of a cul-de-sac?
-
Ah, ageism among remainers has yet again reared its ugly head.
Predictable PC gibberish.
People can't say what they want without someone getting on their high horse and bandying 'isms' about.
Do you cry yourself sleep at night clutching your Diane Abbott pillow?
He's more likely got a JRM pillow :lol:
If he has, after JRM supported Bercow's ruling, he must be biting it in frustration.
Wow, you really don't understand what's going on do you 🤦♂️
If by that you mean I'm not privy to the inner sanctum of the civil unrest conspiracy you keep hinting at, then no.
As for what is going on in Westminster and how politics and Parliament work, then yes. More than you at any rate, it appears.
-
If I was an EU prime minister I'd tell May she can have an extension, but only until the end of December 2020.
A 3-month extension is just more can-kicking and makes it almost inevitable the UK will leave with No Deal on 30th June.
-
arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh and I thought thatcher f**ked us over.
-
If I was an EU prime minister I'd tell May she can have an extension, but only until the end of December 2020.
A 3-month extension is just more can-kicking and makes it almost inevitable the UK will leave with No Deal on 30th June.
A 3 month extension is about the only thing TM and JC actually both agree with. What they do in that period differs but both only want 3 months. Labour confirming that this morning.
As for talk of civil unrest, well given we are all largely sensible people we couldn't possibly know if that is planned or not as we likely don't mix in those circles.....
-
“And then there will be a debate among the 27”, he said. “I guess here again we have to demonstrate patience, which we have been demonstrating consistently during the process of the negotiations.”
And brexiteers say the eu are bullies!!!!!!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/20/juncker-raises-prospect-of-emergency-brexit-summit-next-week
-
“And then there will be a debate among the 27”, he said. “I guess here again we have to demonstrate patience, which we have been demonstrating consistently during the process of the negotiations.”
And brexiteers say the eu are bullies!!!!!!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/20/juncker-raises-prospect-of-emergency-brexit-summit-next-week
They don't lie down and give in to our impossible demands. Of course they're bullies!!
-
If I was an EU prime minister I'd tell May she can have an extension, but only until the end of December 2020.
A 3-month extension is just more can-kicking and makes it almost inevitable the UK will leave with No Deal on 30th June.
A 3 month extension is about the only thing TM and JC actually both agree with. What they do in that period differs but both only want 3 months. Labour confirming that this morning.
As for talk of civil unrest, well given we are all largely sensible people we couldn't possibly know if that is planned or not as we likely don't mix in those circles.....
With the understanding that JC does not hold power, what about a jelly wrestle to the death between TM & JC, let the winner decide.
-
“And then there will be a debate among the 27”, he said. “I guess here again we have to demonstrate patience, which we have been demonstrating consistently during the process of the negotiations.”
And brexiteers say the eu are bullies!!!!!!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/20/juncker-raises-prospect-of-emergency-brexit-summit-next-week
They don't lie down and give in to our impossible demands. Of course they're bullies!!
Talk about death by a thousand cuts, I don't think I would employ TM to make T & sarnies.
-
The sad thing for us as a Nation is that the Vote was not decisive enough.
It may have produced a majority called "large massive or overwhelming" but in truth it was almost 50 50 and that means division.
Cameron should have put a tariff on saying we are in the Eu. and tonleave we must have a majority of say 60 or 66 per cent to trigger a Leave vote
There was no such tariff on the 1976 Referendum but that ended 66-34 in favour of Remain and though I voted Leave I dont remember any great outcry ... and that partly was down to the majority of 33 per cent. I actually went years before I met someone that had voted to Remain because it was a done deal , agreed , just get on with it
This time its virtually man v man woman v woman and it wont end here or any time soon
Mainly Tory MPs even though flying in the face of the 76 majority have conspired againt its result but finally wrestled a Referendum out of Cameron and so I AM SURE that if we do leave eventually there will be immediate and sustained pressure to rejoin. It wont happen in my lifetime I suspect but I think it will eventually come full circle to the point of us wanting to rejoin the EU (in whatever form it then takes)
-
I'm just watching PMQs. What a rabble. A pity we can't sack the whole lot and start again.
-
At least they recognise there is a limit
''Tory MPs vow to quit party if Boris Johnson becomes leader ''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/19/tory-mps-vow-to-quit-party-if-boris-johnson-becomes-leader
-
I'm beginning to actually believe a lot of you take pleasure in the uk's predicament just so you can lambast the Tory's and May..Which I believe is Labours plan as well in the forlorn hope they can get a GE..
personally I don't give 2 hoots what the EU want..I want what's best for the UK..
-
I'm beginning to actually believe a lot of you take pleasure in the uk's predicament just so you can lambast the Tory's and May..Which I believe is Labours plan as well in the forlorn hope they can get a GE..
personally I don't give 2 hoots what the EU want..I want what's best for the UK..
I certainly don't. I do think there is a lot of game-playing going on at Westminster and we should remember that next time we go out and vote.
By conducting the negotiations in such a cack-handed way May has handed the whip hand to the EU, so we have no choice but to listen to their demands. We should have had plans in place for leaving without a deal before Article 50 was triggered and our negotiating strategy should have been to work back from there.
I hope that once Brexit actually happens, or is delayed for a lengthy period (which I think is the most likely outcome) May will go. She has been an utter disaster and I don't want her anywhere near any negotiations about our future relationship with the EU. I would say the same about Corbyn. Both parties need new leaders.
-
If I was an EU prime minister I'd tell May she can have an extension, but only until the end of December 2020.
A 3-month extension is just more can-kicking and makes it almost inevitable the UK will leave with No Deal on 30th June.
A 3 month extension is about the only thing TM and JC actually both agree with. What they do in that period differs but both only want 3 months. Labour confirming that this morning.
As for talk of civil unrest, well given we are all largely sensible people we couldn't possibly know if that is planned or not as we likely don't mix in those circles.....
Apparently Juncker will tell May that she can have a shorter extension than she wants (to 23rd May) or a much longer one. The issue is the UKs participation in Euro Elections.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/tristangrayedi/status/1108359102474932224?p=v
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1108344114121228289
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1108340711106248704
Dear sweet Jesus.
In layman's language.
Dear President Tusk
You know my deal has been rejected by the 1st and 4th greatest majorities of any Govt Bill in the history of the UK Parliament? And that the Speaker has ruled that I can't bring it back a third time?
Well here's my plan. Give us an extension and...I'll bring it back a third time! What do you think? Genius, eh?
What's that? If it fails again, because it will because so many MPs are still saying they'll vote against it, what is my Plan B?
Plan B? Give me a minute...Plan B?
Nope. No Plan B.
All agreed then?
-
It is being reported that President Macron will veto ANY request for an extension. At least that would have the virtue of concentrating minds, I suppose.
-
Jesus wept.
It now turns out that she's asked for an extension to 30 June, after being told by Juncker that the choices were a) extension to 23 May (before the European elections) or b) Extension into 2020 to give us time to sort out shit out.
Is she actually clinically insane?
-
Jesus wept.
It now turns out that she's asked for an extension to 30 June, after being told by Juncker that the choices were a) extension to 23 May (before the European elections) or b) Extension into 2020 to give us time to sort out shit out.
Is she actually clinically insane?
She certainly doesn't listen to anything anyone says to her. I'm no great fan of Juncker but I do think he's bent over backwards to be helpful to May. If it was me I'd be inclined to let her go hang now.
-
It is being reported that President Macron will veto ANY request for an extension. At least that would have the virtue of concentrating minds, I suppose.
That'd be...err...interesting.
Choice between utterly f**king our economy next week, or Revoking A50 which would destroy the Tory party.
For the record, I suspect this is Macron playing games rather than seriously intending to do this. It would be bloody stupid of him.
-
Jesus wept.
It now turns out that she's asked for an extension to 30 June, after being told by Juncker that the choices were a) extension to 23 May (before the European elections) or b) Extension into 2020 to give us time to sort out shit out.
Is she actually clinically insane?
She certainly doesn't listen to anything anyone says to her. I'm no great fan of Juncker but I do think he's bent over backwards to be helpful to May. If it was me I'd be inclined to let her go hang now.
Agreed on all points. The backstop was a massive concession by the EU to get May out of the hole that she personally dug by insisting that we leave the CU.
The fact that she negotiated that while knowing all along that it could never pass, then did f**k all for two months after it was rejected is simply beyond belief. She has lost the right to any .ore help from anyone.
-
I'm beginning to actually believe a lot of you take pleasure in the uk's predicament just so you can lambast the Tory's and May..Which I believe is Labours plan as well in the forlorn hope they can get a GE..
personally I don't give 2 hoots what the EU want..I want what's best for the UK..
Too right they are. The remainers are responsible for the position we are in. As soon as the referendum result was announced they have done their utmost to undermine the government and sabotage every move made in their attempts to thwart Brexit. The amusing thing would be to see the outcome of their activities resulting in the default of a no deal Brexit. That really would be worth buying tickets to see.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
-
It is being reported that President Macron will veto ANY request for an extension. At least that would have the virtue of concentrating minds, I suppose.
That'd be...err...interesting.
Choice between utterly f**king our economy next week, or Revoking A50 which would destroy the Tory party.
For the record, I suspect this is Macron playing games rather than seriously intending to do this. It would be bloody stupid of him.
I don't think he's the sharpest tool in the box, judged by the appalling mess he's making of running France, which is actually much closer to anarchy than the UK. Hopefully Juncker and Tusk will take him to one side and explain things to him.
Don't forget he only got in because the alternative was Marine LePen!
-
Jesus wept.
It now turns out that she's asked for an extension to 30 June, after being told by Juncker that the choices were a) extension to 23 May (before the European elections) or b) Extension into 2020 to give us time to sort out shit out.
Is she actually clinically insane?
Don't forget that Labour also believe the end of June is the date to extend to.....
Interesting point on France though, that may give us effectively 9 days to have a deal or leave on no deal regardless of what parliament says....
-
I'm beginning to actually believe a lot of you take pleasure in the uk's predicament just so you can lambast the Tory's and May..Which I believe is Labours plan as well in the forlorn hope they can get a GE..
personally I don't give 2 hoots what the EU want..I want what's best for the UK..
Too right they are. The remainers are responsible for the position we are in. As soon as the referendum result was announced they have done their utmost to undermine the government and sabotage every move made in their attempts to thwart Brexit. The amusing thing would be to see the outcome of their activities resulting in the default of a no deal Brexit. That really would be worth buying tickets to see.
I sometimes wonder if you are just a WUM Axholme.
You must realise by now that it is Tory MP's in the ERG who are the shiit stirrers. It's them who've consistently undermined TM while she has tried everything to appease them while ignoring what's best for the country in all this.
-
He's a Millwall fan who posts every day on the off-topic forum of a football club in the league below his. Yes, he's a WUM.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
Soft Brexit as part of a customs union
Revoke article 50 for a period until we know what the f**k is happening, then invoke it again
Second referendum in light of illegal foreign money pumped into the leave campaign, nobody knowing what the f**k is going on, a clearer idea of the facts now, etc etc
All of these ideas have been put forward repeatedly since the vote. The only reason they aren't "realistic" is because the hard-right lunatics running the country won't listen to them.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
Soft Brexit as part of a customs union
Revoke article 50 for a period until we know what the f**k is happening, then invoke it again
Second referendum in light of illegal foreign money pumped into the leave campaign, nobody knowing what the f**k is going on, a clearer idea of the facts now, etc etc
All of these ideas have been put forward repeatedly since the vote. The only reason they aren't "realistic" is because the hard-right lunatics running the country won't listen to them.
Doesn't a customs union prevent us from striking up trade deals with the rest of the world though thereby shackling us to the EU forever?
-
All largely irrelevant given the EU seem to have said May passes a deal next week or no extension. They also won't open up the WA so no deal is getting far too bloody close!
-
Rumours that May has called a meeting with Corbyn and other party leaders at 6.00pm and will then give a statement to the nation at 8.00pm. What's she going to discuss and say?
Pass her deal on condition it goes for a referrendum? If it fails she will call a GE?
-
With her anything is possible. If her past speeches are to go by she won't say a lot.
-
Rumours that May has called a meeting with Corbyn and other party leaders at 6.00pm and will then give a statement to the nation at 8.00pm. What's she going to discuss and say?
Pass her deal on condition it goes for a referrendum? If it fails she will call a GE?
She will just ask them to vote for her deal... again.
-
Hasn't Bercow already ruled out MV3 on May's deal?
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
Soft Brexit as part of a customs union
Revoke article 50 for a period until we know what the f**k is happening, then invoke it again
Second referendum in light of illegal foreign money pumped into the leave campaign, nobody knowing what the f**k is going on, a clearer idea of the facts now, etc etc
All of these ideas have been put forward repeatedly since the vote. The only reason they aren't "realistic" is because the hard-right lunatics running the country won't listen to them.
Doesn't a customs union prevent us from striking up trade deals with the rest of the world though thereby shackling us to the EU forever?
No. That's the single market isn't it?
Personally I would prefer to stay in but if we are leaving then in 2016 we should have invested in training people and production, austerity ruins a successful Brexit. We should then leave with something similar to Norway, which Mays red lines ruins any chance of.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
This is a gem. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.
I assume you've not bothered reading g the 70 pages on this thread or the 100 and odd on the other one where the pros and cons of everything from No Deal to Ref2 have been discussed to exhaustion? You see that as just moaning and criticising?
Here's the summary:
No Deal. Total freedom for us to do whatever we want trade wise and politically. But the consequence being that we have a long, slow hit to our economy over the long term, and an unknown immediate hard and sharp hit. No one suggests we can come out net positive for a generation or more. Crisis in NI. Absolutely not what anyone on the Leave side was proposing in 2016. Supported now only by people on the Far Right.
May's deal: Sorts out the Irish problem short term by tying us into the CU. Possibility of us leaving if a technical solution to NI is found in the future, but no-one knows what that is. Supported by centrist Tories. Opposed by everyone else. Still results in a long slow economic hit.
Norway+ deal: Keeps us in the SM and CU. We leave the political aspects of the EU Minimises the economic hit. Proposed loudly and frequently by Farage in 2016. Now apparently it's a betrayal of Brexit. Possibly supported by Labour and a group of other MPs
Ref 2: Puts the question back to the people with a proper understanding of the issues,and multiple options. Difficult to implement given the number of politicians who have upped the ante by calling it a betrayal of democracy.
There you go. Take your pick. Discuss any of the above like an adult.
Or just complain that everyone who disagrees with you is a moaning traitor. Your choice.
-
norway plus please BST
-
Reckon Norway+ would get through?
-
Aye. I reckon that's probably the closest to the centre of gravity of the population's opinions.
Trouble is, the majority of the Tory party is dead set against it because they consider it to hamper Britain's ability to strike independent deals. And Corbyn is dead set against it because SM membership (he claims) would block the path to the Socialist Utopia.
And, whilst it would be the least economically damaging Brexit, it would still leave us with the relationship with the EU that some Norwegians call "Pay, Obey, No Say."
Which is why, on balance, I don't support it.
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
If she did that I'd love to see the faces of the DUP. Do they vote against and stick to their principles or do they abandon those selfsame principles and vote in favour purely to try and cling on to the Magic Money Tree that would disappear after a General Election..?
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
Which is what Corbyn wanted so he will be delighted. Even more so if May is leader as I cant see how she gets the Tories back in or that they would let her. Wouldn't they all have to agree with her to allow a general election? In fact isn't a no confidence vote more likely than her winning a general election vote?
Amazingly Corbyn walked out of the meeting with may and opposition leaders because he didn't like who else was there. What a chap he is...
-
Unbelievable!
https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1108448464462114818
-
Unbelievable!
https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1108448464462114818
Pathetic. Student politics all over.
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
It will be just another few turns of the hamster wheel, whichever side you’re on it doesn’t matter this Country is truly f**ked!
-
Unbelievable!
https://mobile.twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1108448464462114818
If that is true, in the middle of a crisis of this magnitude, it is beyond belief.
-
The line now is that May WON'T say anything about a GE when she speaks to the cameras at 20:15. Sounds for all the world like her office has been flying a kite to see what the response would be.
-
Well, I've long believed that we get the politicians we deserve.
We don't deserve anything better than these two f**king idiots.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1108452803851227136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108452803851227136&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47614151
-
May wants an all-party meeting but won't to listen to anybody.
Corbyn has said he wants to build an all-party consensus but won't talk to everybody.
What a fecking disgrace.
-
Send the tanks in
-
Replying to BST #2082 above I would say let May have her deal as long as the People get a straight vote after that
Mays Deal v Remain that would sort it out for now (temporarily anyway)
-
It'll be the same b*llocks as last time. I want to give the UK people the Brexit they voted for, etc.
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
I'm sure someone posted that earlier.....
Speculation now that she will just take the opportunity to appeal to us, the great British public, to put pressure on our MP's to back her deal. This is the great British public of whom only 12% support it.
Useless fact. If she appears at a podium with the PM's crest on it - its a statement on behalf of the country and she is not resigning nor calling a GE. If there is no crest on the podium she is appearing as leader of the Tory party and will be calling a GE.
-
Apologies Wilts. Didn't see it.
-
Well what the f**k was THAT all about?
She IS insane isn't she? It's everyone else to blame. I'm right, I'm right, I'm right!
-
Actually, thinking again, that speech was sinister. She's gone full-on populist. No PM has EVER castigated Parliament like that. It is deeply, deeply dangerous. I genuinely DO think she's unhinged because no sane PM would ever do that.
-
She appears not to appreciate that if you treat Parliament like shit, shit is what you'll tend to get chucked back at you.
-
It's a deeply weird situation.
She is in a position where she is untouchable in Parliament, but utterly impotent. What you've just seen tonight was a PM venting her fury over that situation. But a British PM saying to the UK people that she is on their side and Parliament isn't? f**k me! Just stop and think about that.
-
It's a deeply weird situation.
She is in a position where she is untouchable in Parliament, but utterly impotent. What you've just seen tonight was a PM venting her fury over that situation. But a British PM saying to the UK people that she is on their side and Parliament isn't? f**k me! Just stop and think about that.
Wasn’t Hitler on the side of the German people?
-
It's a deeply weird situation.
She is in a position where she is untouchable in Parliament, but utterly impotent. What you've just seen tonight was a PM venting her fury over that situation. But a British PM saying to the UK people that she is on their side and Parliament isn't? f**k me! Just stop and think about that.
Wasn’t Hitler on the side of the German people?
And look what he did to the Reichstag.
-
Does she have advisors feeding her crap saying everyone loves Brexit and thinks she's doing brilliant?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1108149985948983296
-
Does she have advisors feeding her crap saying everyone loves Brexit and thinks she's doing brilliant?
I think her advisors are broomstick and axeholm
-
After cynically trying to blame Parliament for her complete mismanagement of Brexit, I'd actually love her to get MV3 voted on, because it wouldn't surprise me if the majority against went up again after that.
-
f**k me. I'm still a Corbyn supporter (just about), but that is f**king dismal behaviour. I have no doubt the meeting was a sham to begin with, but to flounce out under any circumstances is shocking this close to D-day.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
This is a gem. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.
I assume you've not bothered reading g the 70 pages on this thread or the 100 and odd on the other one where the pros and cons of everything from No Deal to Ref2 have been discussed to exhaustion? You see that as just moaning and criticising?
Here's the summary:
No Deal. Total freedom for us to do whatever we want trade wise and politically. But the consequence being that we have a long, slow hit to our economy over the long term, and an unknown immediate hard and sharp hit. No one suggests we can come out net positive for a generation or more. Crisis in NI. Absolutely not what anyone on the Leave side was proposing in 2016. Supported now only by people on the Far Right.
May's deal: Sorts out the Irish problem short term by tying us into the CU. Possibility of us leaving if a technical solution to NI is found in the future, but no-one knows what that is. Supported by centrist Tories. Opposed by everyone else. Still results in a long slow economic hit.
Norway+ deal: Keeps us in the SM and CU. We leave the political aspects of the EU Minimises the economic hit. Proposed loudly and frequently by Farage in 2016. Now apparently it's a betrayal of Brexit. Possibly supported by Labour and a group of other MPs
Ref 2: Puts the question back to the people with a proper understanding of the issues,and multiple options. Difficult to implement given the number of politicians who have upped the ante by calling it a betrayal of democracy.
There you go. Take your pick. Discuss any of the above like an adult.
Or just complain that everyone who disagrees with you is a moaning traitor. Your choice.
Christ, I know what the options are. Its how you implement them that's the issue?
I'm waiting.....
-
I'm beginning to actually believe a lot of you take pleasure in the uk's predicament just so you can lambast the Tory's and May..Which I believe is Labours plan as well in the forlorn hope they can get a GE..
personally I don't give 2 hoots what the EU want..I want what's best for the UK..
But it's not about what the EU wants is it, it's about what we want within the rules of the EU which the UK participated in bedding down, one cannot keep blaming the EU for decisions that our government is incapable of making. The government knows what the TOR are and therefore know they have to make decisions that fit within the scope but they cannot agree on their own side what to do can they?
I'd like to buy a loaf of bread please-certainly that'll be a pound. Sorry I only brought 50p, I'll be back in a minute. Hi you're back, that was quick, loaf of bread? yes please here's my fifty pence .......................
-
The sanest thing to do imo (which doesnt count for much) and what I heard was "rumoured" to be what May was going to announce -
is get MP's to agree to pass Mays Deal on the condition that we then have a straight vote. The Vote would be whether the people endorsed leaving with that deal or Remaining in the EU
I said in an earlier post though #2054 - that this whole thing was from the start too divisive to be permanently sorted for decades imo
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
This is a gem. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.
I assume you've not bothered reading g the 70 pages on this thread or the 100 and odd on the other one where the pros and cons of everything from No Deal to Ref2 have been discussed to exhaustion? You see that as just moaning and criticising?
Here's the summary:
No Deal. Total freedom for us to do whatever we want trade wise and politically. But the consequence being that we have a long, slow hit to our economy over the long term, and an unknown immediate hard and sharp hit. No one suggests we can come out net positive for a generation or more. Crisis in NI. Absolutely not what anyone on the Leave side was proposing in 2016. Supported now only by people on the Far Right.
May's deal: Sorts out the Irish problem short term by tying us into the CU. Possibility of us leaving if a technical solution to NI is found in the future, but no-one knows what that is. Supported by centrist Tories. Opposed by everyone else. Still results in a long slow economic hit.
Norway+ deal: Keeps us in the SM and CU. We leave the political aspects of the EU Minimises the economic hit. Proposed loudly and frequently by Farage in 2016. Now apparently it's a betrayal of Brexit. Possibly supported by Labour and a group of other MPs
Ref 2: Puts the question back to the people with a proper understanding of the issues,and multiple options. Difficult to implement given the number of politicians who have upped the ante by calling it a betrayal of democracy.
There you go. Take your pick. Discuss any of the above like an adult.
Or just complain that everyone who disagrees with you is a moaning traitor. Your choice.
Christ, I know what the options are. Its how you implement them that's the issue?
I'm waiting.....
You need to pick one first.
-
Actually, thinking again, that speech was sinister. She's gone full-on populist. No PM has EVER castigated Parliament like that. It is deeply, deeply dangerous. I genuinely DO think she's unhinged because no sane PM would ever do that.
BST I am with you totally on the unhinged bit because time and again she seems to take a breath and then come out with exactly the same viewpoint / proposal / mantra. It is truly bizarre
I would think the advisors are having a free ride at the moment on this issue. They can suggest a different pitch and some probably are doing and I have visions of 3 or more of the saying "in my opinion we should do this ....." and May considering it for half a second before saying " well I think we should stick with my deal"
On the other side of the coin they can say " I think we should continue to try to get your deal approved by MP's" to which she would say yes I am glad someone can see its merit
Last night I was expecting (silly old fool me) something different - something to take us further down the line. I had hoped she would have talked to the Party Leaders but unfortunately JC walked out because Chuka was not a Party Leader. To me that too was a glorious chance missed
They could have proposed that there would be cross Party approval for her deal on condition that the deal would then be passed back to the people for their approval - but instead JC trotted off and the chance was gone . However those remaining might well have proposed that along with maybe another credible option / idea and like I said as with the advisors she might have thought for a split second and said "actually I think I will go with my Deal"
Then despite the Speaker ruling the deal cant be voted on again without subtantial change - and given that it had already the "fame" that it has been defeated by the heaviest ever Commons majority ever AND the 4th heaviest Commons majority ever she took a deep breath and we waited .....
..... eventually she presided over last nights statement which basically blamed the MP's for not voting for her deal. (Thats what I took from it and very little else). It was as though she said "my deal is the way forward - but you the MPs just cant see it". They can see it clearly but the issue is so fractious that Remainers are voting to kill off bits that faciliate "Leave" and vice versa
Then she trotted out the statement that the people are sick and tired and want us to make progress but that is a grey statement. Lots of them do but at least 48% of them did not want to Leave in the first place and they probably want to get on with it "yes" - but they want a peoples vote but Politicians can make any statement such as that mean what they want.
So I think she was and is unhinged but then I got to thinking - who is maddest ? Her for plodding on like a broken record or me for writing 10 pages of A4 that nobody will ever read suggesting SHE is MAD ? I probably dont need a Vote on that thanks
-
f**k me. I'm still a Corbyn supporter (just about), but that is f**king dismal behaviour. I have no doubt the meeting was a sham to begin with, but to flounce out under any circumstances is shocking this close to D-day.
After him saying you need to speak to people you disagree with i.e. IRA, Hezbollah.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
-
If it got to 17.5 Million May would just say "we must deliver on the Referendum Result - when in the largest Democratic event we ever held the people voted to leave"
-
Apparently it only started last night. Crazy how quick it's grown.
-
f**k me. I'm still a Corbyn supporter (just about), but that is f**king dismal behaviour. I have no doubt the meeting was a sham to begin with, but to flounce out under any circumstances is shocking this close to D-day.
After him saying you need to speak to people you disagree with i.e. IRA, Hezbollah.
Yes - I am no Fan of May but Corbyn is not in my Top 150 best politicains ever either
He seems to be doing within his Party what May is doing in Parliament in that the Labour Party wants to support a Peoples Vote (rightly or wrongly) and he as Leader seems to be pushing it away at every opportunity. He had yet another clear opportunity to (maybe) make progress last night but also had a clear "get out of jail card" when Chuka Umunna appeared at the Meeting for Party Leaders
So JC played the Umunna is not a Party Leader card and instead of them getting together and demanding progress by laying down viable alternatives and then publishing them. Simplistic ? YES - but nobody is coming out of this with any credit to their name
Never known anything like it EVER
-
BST I am with you totally on the unhinged bit because time and again she seems to take a breath and then come out with exactly the same viewpoint / proposal / mantra. It is truly bizarre
It's amazing how much of this applies to her....
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180926110841.htm
* Egoism: an excessive preoccupation with one's own advantage at the expense of others and the community
* Machiavellianism: a manipulative, callous attitude and a belief that the ends justify the means
* Moral disengagement: cognitive processing style that allow behaving unethically without feeling distress
* Narcissism: excessive self-absorption, a sense of superiority, and an extreme need for attention from others
* Psychological entitlement: a recurring belief that one is better than others and deserves better treatment
* Psychopathy: lack of empathy and self-control, combined with impulsive behaviour
* Sadism: a desire to inflict mental or physical harm on others for one's own pleasure or to benefit oneself
* Self-interest: a desire to further and highlight one's own social and financial status
* Spitefulness: destructiveness and willingness to cause harm to others, even if one harms oneself in the process
The garish clothes, shoes, ridiculous dancing, the snarling, the lack of empathy etc etc....
-
Apparently it only started last night. Crazy how quick it's grown.
Yes but unfortunately I have signed countless of them and all have come to nothing. The March on Saturday will probably attract at least the same number of actual bodies (round 300 000 maybe more) and they will be collectively swept under the carpet - and dismissed unfortunately as "Remoaners" or some other disparaging comment - and carrying no weight because 17.4 Million people voted to Leave the EU and we (May would say) must deliver on the Will of the British People
Its a shame because it has gone on longer than a Sheff U lose appeal thread on here
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
-
I may no fan of Corbyn, but he had a one on one with May apparently before he walked out, according to Barry Gardner on Radio 4 this morning, a fact not disputed by John Humphries. He walked out because he was told it was a meeting of party leaders, Umana's group is not a political party. However it made no difference as May did not listen yet again to anyone and remains stubborn over her deal.
Both parties need new leaders.
-
I want a no deal WTO departure from the EU, but I have to say my respect for TM has grown the longer this has gone on, because she has stuck to her guns as much as she has been allowed to, and despite being vilified by all and sundry has shown great determination and character to see this matter to an end. Maybe in years to come history will give her greater regard and respect than what she has at this moment in time.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
This is a gem. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.
I assume you've not bothered reading g the 70 pages on this thread or the 100 and odd on the other one where the pros and cons of everything from No Deal to Ref2 have been discussed to exhaustion? You see that as just moaning and criticising?
Here's the summary:
No Deal. Total freedom for us to do whatever we want trade wise and politically. But the consequence being that we have a long, slow hit to our economy over the long term, and an unknown immediate hard and sharp hit. No one suggests we can come out net positive for a generation or more. Crisis in NI. Absolutely not what anyone on the Leave side was proposing in 2016. Supported now only by people on the Far Right.
May's deal: Sorts out the Irish problem short term by tying us into the CU. Possibility of us leaving if a technical solution to NI is found in the future, but no-one knows what that is. Supported by centrist Tories. Opposed by everyone else. Still results in a long slow economic hit.
Norway+ deal: Keeps us in the SM and CU. We leave the political aspects of the EU Minimises the economic hit. Proposed loudly and frequently by Farage in 2016. Now apparently it's a betrayal of Brexit. Possibly supported by Labour and a group of other MPs
Ref 2: Puts the question back to the people with a proper understanding of the issues,and multiple options. Difficult to implement given the number of politicians who have upped the ante by calling it a betrayal of democracy.
There you go. Take your pick. Discuss any of the above like an adult.
Or just complain that everyone who disagrees with you is a moaning traitor. Your choice.
Christ, I know what the options are. Its how you implement them that's the issue?
I'm waiting.....
You need to pick one first.
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
That's part of implementing!
OK, ill make it easier for you.
Your the pm, your preferred choice is.....
Explain you you get it through parliament in your own words.
Not surprised BST has suddenly gone quiet when he can't answer a question.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
Looks like the site has overloaded and crashed, maybe a temporary glitch.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
An empty vessel makes the most noise.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
An empty vessel makes the most noise.
As you amply demonstrate.
-
A very good point here: https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/1108480028533293057
That speech last night was abhorrent in every way. During the referendum campaign, an MP was shot and killed by a lunatic who was stoked up by talk like this. Truly disgusting.
-
No BS. I was just having a break from dealing with your nonsense.
It is very, very easy. You have a policy to find out what the opinion of MPs is. You hold a series of indicative votes in the House on different possible outcomes and you develop your EU negotiation policy from there, knowing what support you have at home.
What May has done instead is to determine her policy without talking to anyone outside her immediate advisory group, then spent two years negotiating a position that is THE least supported one in the House and the country. And then, when that is roundly rejected, she insists that everyone else change their minds.
It about your philosophical approach. Do you seek a consensus position that brings people together, or do you ignore people, then hector and insult them when they don't agree with you.
For the record, if she'd taken the approach I suggest, I think she'd have found a majority prepared to support some form of Norway+ deal. That would have torn the Tory party apart, but, frankly, tough shit. What she has done is to put holding the Tory party together at the top of the agenda, and I suspect the final outcome will seem that aim dashed anyway.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RFANVY5Zls&feature=youtu.be
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
Looks like the site has overloaded and crashed, maybe a temporary glitch.
I can see why the site crashed. The number of signatories is currently increasing by nearly 4000 per minute.
Currently approaching 1.25 million. Increasing at the rate of 50 per second.
-
You know what? It's a sad statement on where discussion has got to when a smart bloke like Wing Co thinks that any of us are taking pleasure in seeing our country humiliate itself like this, and run the risk of stumbling into economic catastrophe.
Isn't it possible for intelligent, honest people to disagree without being seen as simply wanting to win an argument?
Intelligent and honest people can disagree, but intelligent honest people give alternatives too.
You lot don't, just moan and criticise and don't come up with realistic alternatives.
This is a gem. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.
I assume you've not bothered reading g the 70 pages on this thread or the 100 and odd on the other one where the pros and cons of everything from No Deal to Ref2 have been discussed to exhaustion? You see that as just moaning and criticising?
Here's the summary:
No Deal. Total freedom for us to do whatever we want trade wise and politically. But the consequence being that we have a long, slow hit to our economy over the long term, and an unknown immediate hard and sharp hit. No one suggests we can come out net positive for a generation or more. Crisis in NI. Absolutely not what anyone on the Leave side was proposing in 2016. Supported now only by people on the Far Right.
May's deal: Sorts out the Irish problem short term by tying us into the CU. Possibility of us leaving if a technical solution to NI is found in the future, but no-one knows what that is. Supported by centrist Tories. Opposed by everyone else. Still results in a long slow economic hit.
Norway+ deal: Keeps us in the SM and CU. We leave the political aspects of the EU Minimises the economic hit. Proposed loudly and frequently by Farage in 2016. Now apparently it's a betrayal of Brexit. Possibly supported by Labour and a group of other MPs
Ref 2: Puts the question back to the people with a proper understanding of the issues,and multiple options. Difficult to implement given the number of politicians who have upped the ante by calling it a betrayal of democracy.
There you go. Take your pick. Discuss any of the above like an adult.
Or just complain that everyone who disagrees with you is a moaning traitor. Your choice.
BST
Surely there is no economic hit in Norway-plus. That's why, superficially at least, it's attractive. The odd thing is that it doesn't seem to have much support amongst MPs. Labour accepts the Customs Union part of it, but not the Single Market.
TBH, I think this has been a huge failure on the part of Remainers. Instead of spending three years trying to reverse the result of the Referendum, Norway-plus is what they should have got behind.
-
TRB
The hit would come from the fact that we'd have zero say over future changes to SM and CU rules. We'd just have to adopt them and adapt to them.
I agree by the way. The problem is that Corbyn has refused to lead on that be side he's ideogically against the SM.
-
Good old Nige.
https://mobile.twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1108511980908875778
With of The People, eh?
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
Done and shared, thanks for the link Donny, it's amazing to watch how fast the number is rising.
Already 620.000 signed up for this in 12 hours but my Reply #2120 above would still apply I am guessing
An empty vessel makes the most noise.
As you amply demonstrate.
:lol:
-
TRB
The hit would come from the fact that we'd have zero say over future changes to SM and CU rules. We'd just have to adopt them and adapt to them.
I agree by the way. The problem is that Corbyn has refused to lead on that be side he's ideogically against the SM.
It doesn't quite sound like taking back control BST.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
-
TRB
The hit would come from the fact that we'd have zero say over future changes to SM and CU rules. We'd just have to adopt them and adapt to them.
I agree by the way. The problem is that Corbyn has refused to lead on that be side he's ideogically against the SM.
It doesn't quite sound like taking back control BST.
We were never going to be able to, as many people failed to understand.
-
It's not about the petition starting a debate in Parliament. It's about it changing the public agenda. It needs several million to do that. That then gives ammunition to fire back at the Will of The People argument.
It's about changing public perception.
Farage's Fifty against three quarters of a million in London this weekend is the sort of thing that commands attention.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
-
No BS. I was just having a break from dealing with your nonsense.
It is very, very easy. You have a policy to find out what the opinion of MPs is. You hold a series of indicative votes in the House on different possible outcomes and you develop your EU negotiation policy from there, knowing what support you have at home.
What May has done instead is to determine her policy without talking to anyone outside her immediate advisory group, then spent two years negotiating a position that is THE least supported one in the House and the country. And then, when that is roundly rejected, she insists that everyone else change their minds.
It about your philosophical approach. Do you seek a consensus position that brings people together, or do you ignore people, then hector and insult them when they don't agree with you.
For the record, if she'd taken the approach I suggest, I think she'd have found a majority prepared to support some form of Norway+ deal. That would have torn the Tory party apart, but, frankly, tough shit. What she has done is to put holding the Tory party together at the top of the agenda, and I suspect the final outcome will seem that aim dashed anyway.
Wow, still no answer and more waffle piffle and flannel.
Again
out of your previously stated exit options l, which is your preferred, and how would you get it through Parliament?
-
Meanwhile the more I think about May's speech last night, the more bizarrely unsettling it seems.
She's had one aim since Jan 2017. To keep the Tory party together and fight off any thread from the Right.
That was why she made the disastrous decision back then to insist that Brexit meant leaving the CU and SM. I DIDNT automatically mean that, but she chose to make that equivalence.
That was the decision that led us to the shithole we are now in. Because she's then spent 2 years trying to find a formula that gives her that Brexit while not f**king NI. And the formula she found is anathema to the far-Right of her party (because it doesn't guarantee we leave the CU) and to anyone to the left of Ken Clarke (because it implies we DO leave the CU).
f**king disastrous leadership. Triangulation is supposed to be about finding something everyone can hold their nose and buy into. She's found something that everyone feels compelled to reject.
But then. That speech last night.
What was the aim?
She's gone in front of the nation to say, "I'm right, everyone else is wrong. And to prove I'm right, I'm going to take the country into the last few hours before the biggest calamity since 1939, with no plan of what to do except insist everyone agrees I'm right."
And in doing that, she's also said to the population that elected MPs are the enemy.
Stop and think about it.
Her aim to keep the Tory party together is shot. You can't find common ground on this between Rees-Mogg and Grieve. So that's her primary aim gone.
By pouring vitriol on MPs last night, she's just guaranteed that her deal will be rejected again. Look at the right hand image here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1108642820989075457
That is a TORY MP who she needs on side to get her deal passed.
That speech has fatally holed all her plans. And fanned the populist, anti-MP feeling. It is simultaneously the most incompetent and most dangerous speech I have ever heard from a British PM.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
-
You're embarrassing yourself BS. Read what I read.
You find out what Parliament will support.
I don't know what they will support because I'm not a f**king psychic. If I were PM, I'd have found out by holding indicative votes. Then I'd go I to negotiations with the EU knowing g what support I had at home, rather than piss 2 f**king years up the wall.
If there was no prospect of Parliament finding a majority for anything, I'd dissolve Parliament and put the question to a GE.
That's kind of how our system works. This control that you want to take back. That's how you operate that control.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
And the Most f**king Hopeless Analogy of the Year Award goes to...
-
Meanwhile the petition has gone viral with all major news sites talking about it and various celebs promoting it, the site has crashed a few times and then they have to close it for maintenance before rebooting, it's near 750k
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
You could better apply that comparison to TM's speech last night.
-
TRB
The hit would come from the fact that we'd have zero say over future changes to SM and CU rules. We'd just have to adopt them and adapt to them.
I agree by the way. The problem is that Corbyn has refused to lead on that be side he's ideogically against the SM.
Where we are now, Norway-plus seems the "best-worst" outcome. I wouldn't have started from where we did. We should have had comprehensive plans for No Deal in place before we triggered Article 50. If that meant we left the EU a year later, so be it. We would have left with a much better deal and probably would enjoy a much better future relationship with the EU as a result.
-
TRB
You may recall that the official Leave campaign, headed by senior Tories who have been in the Cabinet during this shit show, said explicitly in their Referendum literature that this would all be sorted before we triggered A50.
https://mobile.twitter.com/peston/status/1102954208150634496?lang=en
So they said that they'd negotiate a new deal before triggering A50. Instead, the f**king ruling party still hasn't negotiated WITH ITSELF what sort of deal they want, 103 weeks AFTER triggering A50.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
And talking about bunkers....
https://news.sky.com/story/the-pms-conduct-puts-parliaments-long-term-vitality-in-peril-11671146
-
Meanwhile the petition has gone viral with all major news sites talking about it and various celebs promoting it, the site has crashed a few times and then they have to close it for maintenance before rebooting, it's near 750k
Is that it? 😂
-
TRB
You may recall that the official Leave campaign, headed by senior Tories who have been in the Cabinet during this shit show, said explicitly in their Referendum literature that this would all be sorted before we triggered A50.
https://mobile.twitter.com/peston/status/1102954208150634496?lang=en
So they said that they'd negotiate a new deal before triggering A50. Instead, the f**king ruling party still hasn't negotiated WITH ITSELF what sort of deal they want, 103 weeks AFTER triggering A50.
Which proves the point that the Tories made a huge error in choosing a Remainer as leader. That itself was a consequence of Cameron washing his hands of the mess he had created.
Although the field of candidates in the Tory leadership election was probably the weakest in history.
-
Meanwhile the petition has gone viral with all major news sites talking about it and various celebs promoting it, the site has crashed a few times and then they have to close it for maintenance before rebooting, it's near 750k
Is that it? 😂
And increasing at the rate of 80 per second before the site crashed.
That's every second. Nearly twice Farage's Fifty.
-
Meanwhile the petition has gone viral with all major news sites talking about it and various celebs promoting it, the site has crashed a few times and then they have to close it for maintenance before rebooting, it's near 750k
Revoking Article 50 unilaterally without either a Referendum or a General Election before it would be an absolute disaster. If you want riots every weekend, that is the way to go.
-
I agree entirely TRB. This is about seizing the agenda though. Getting the message across that there are lots of other people with wills.
In the last 12 hours, that agenda has got three times as many signatories as one calling for No Deal did in six months.
It's already the third largest number of gov.uk petition signatories and folk only became aware of it last night.
-
Very interesting article.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-15/the-brexit-deal-is-just-too-good-for-europe
-
Peston has posted copies of a junior minister's Brexit briefing notes.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1108696588153700354
Telling him how to say nothing at all and how to answer expected questions equally saying nothing at all.
No wonder we really are in the mire!
-
TRB
That article is nonsense because it totally avoids the most important issue and the reason for it.
The entire EU strategy has been based on the principle that, if we want a deal, it has to come with a guarantee that Ireland is not f**ked about. He blithely skirts around that.
If it wasn't for Ireland, the entire situation would be different. So his conclusion that the EU is demo straying to other countries that it's not worth leaving is nonsense. He's drawing a general conclusion from a specific example.
It reads like another "I'll decide what I believe first, then write an article to support that" piece.
-
I saw this posted on another site, apparently from a Guardian newsfeed....
Theresa May’s Downing Street speech last night may have seemed baffling to those watching at home but there may be a clue as to its purpose in how the government social media machine has used the footage.
Soon after she finished talking in Downing Street, the official UK government Facebook pay began paying to promote a clip of her speaking under the banner “Brexit: Let’s Get On With It”.
The adverts, funded using public money, began running on Facebook last night and have already been seen at least two million times, according to the social network’s new advertising disclosure rules.
These views do not necessarily mean than a Facebook user bothered to watch any of the video - but they do mean that they saw a video in their newsfeed of Theresa May talking alongside the quote “You want this stage of the Brexit process to be over and done with. I agree. I am on your side.”
Although the sums involved are not enormous - up to £10,000 has been spent promoting the video since last night - it is another example of how Facebook ads are being used to put pressure on MPs to back Brexit by directly targeting MPs. One mysterious group campaigning for a hard Brexit, which has never revealed its financial backers, has spent almost half a million pounds on targeted Facebook ads since last October.
Disgraceful covert manipulation.
-
Meanwhile millions sit in the middle wanting to leave with a deal....
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
For anyone who doesn't want Theresa's deal or No Deal please sign x
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
For anyone who doesn't want Theresa's deal or No Deal please sign x
b*llocks. Some people may want none of those 3 options.
-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
For anyone interested x
For anyone who doesn't want Theresa's deal or No Deal please sign x
b*llocks. Some people may want none of those 3 options.
Not b*llocks. It's easier to get another type of Brexit in a few years with a different government than leaving with no deal.
-
The thing about revoking Article 50 - it is a really bad thing for the Govt to do without a GE or Ref2 to underpin it. But...given the stupidly dangerous game that May is playing, planning a vote on her deal 24 hours before the leave deadline, revocation really does now come into play.
One thing is certain. Leaving with no deal would be the ultimate insult to the democratic process. There has never been anything remotely approaching a majority for No Deal in any poll. No one was supporting No Deal in the 2016 campaign [1] and the fact that a handful of the usual suspects have flipped and moved to supporting it now tells you all you need to know about their respect for democracy.
So, if we're faced with crashing out with No Deal next Friday, a vote to revoke A50 might be the only option.
[1] And before the usual suspects in here start bleating that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 wanted No Deal and knew what they were voting for, here's a challenge. Go back and find a clip of ANY prominent Brexiter advocating a No Deal Brexit in June 2016. For every one you find, I'll post 10 of others promoting various forms of deal.
-
Exactly BST. It's as much a myth as all leave voters being thick, uneducated racists.
DO we voted to leave 3 years ago. Dragging it out does not change that nor should an incapable government.
-
TRB
That article is nonsense because it totally avoids the most important issue and the reason for it.
The entire EU strategy has been based on the principle that, if we want a deal, it has to come with a guarantee that Ireland is not f**ked about. He blithely skirts around that.
If it wasn't for Ireland, the entire situation would be different. So his conclusion that the EU is demo straying to other countries that it's not worth leaving is nonsense. He's drawing a general conclusion from a specific example.
It reads like another "I'll decide what I believe first, then write an article to support that" piece.
The problem of the Irish border could have been dealt with in context of the future relationship. That's how the UK saw it and it is why the first phase of the negotiations dragged on so long.
However, we are where we are, and IMO the best way forward would be Norway-plus. I'm surprised there is so little support for it among MPs. As I said earlier, if Remainers had got behind it from day one rather than trying to re-fight the Referendum, there's a good chance that's what we'd have got.
-
976000+ signatures gathered to revoke A50 in just 16 hours.
Click on it and watch the votes change - every 15 seconds another 400 or so go on - and (this is an edit) now over 980000 - 4000 since I posted the original
60 people on the March to Leave have arrived at the Red Lion (- Farage of course)
-
The thing about revoking Article 50 - it is a really bad thing for the Govt to do without a GE or Ref2 to underpin it. But...given the stupidly dangerous game that May is playing, planning a vote on her deal 24 hours before the leave deadline, revocation really does now come into play.
One thing is certain. Leaving with no deal would be the ultimate insult to the democratic process. There has never been anything remotely approaching a majority for No Deal in any poll. No one was supporting No Deal in the 2016 campaign [1] and the fact that a handful of the usual suspects have flipped and moved to supporting it now tells you all you need to know about their respect for democracy.
So, if we're faced with crashing out with No Deal next Friday, a vote to revoke A50 might be the only option.
[1] And before the usual suspects in here start bleating that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 wanted No Deal and knew what they were voting for, here's a challenge. Go back and find a clip of ANY prominent Brexiter advocating a No Deal Brexit in June 2016. For every one you find, I'll post 10 of others promoting various forms of deal.
It's a very fluid situation, it may well be that the longer it goes on, the more people will want a no deal
-
The outcome of today's EU Summit will be most interesting, but the really interesting bits probably won't emerge in the public domain (at least until someone leaks them!)
My gut feeling is that the EU27 will grudgingly offer May an extension to 22-23 May, simply because of the legislation that needs to be passed. The interesting bit is what they tell her they will do If/ when she loses MV3 next week. If she goes back and asks for a longer extension, what do they say?
If it's no to another extension, then the choice is Revoke (and hold another Referendum) or No Deal.
-
976000+ signatures gathered to revoke A50 in just 16 hours.
Click on it and watch the votes change - every 15 seconds another 400 or so go on - and (this is an edit) now over 980000 - 4000 since I posted the original
60 people on the March to Leave have arrived at the Red Lion (- Farage of course)
Over a million now.
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
It's getting a bit crowded in this bunker...... over 1 million in here now!
-
15,000 in 10 mins seems to be the rate.
-
The thing about revoking Article 50 - it is a really bad thing for the Govt to do without a GE or Ref2 to underpin it. But...given the stupidly dangerous game that May is playing, planning a vote on her deal 24 hours before the leave deadline, revocation really does now come into play.
One thing is certain. Leaving with no deal would be the ultimate insult to the democratic process. There has never been anything remotely approaching a majority for No Deal in any poll. No one was supporting No Deal in the 2016 campaign [1] and the fact that a handful of the usual suspects have flipped and moved to supporting it now tells you all you need to know about their respect for democracy.
So, if we're faced with crashing out with No Deal next Friday, a vote to revoke A50 might be the only option.
[1] And before the usual suspects in here start bleating that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 wanted No Deal and knew what they were voting for, here's a challenge. Go back and find a clip of ANY prominent Brexiter advocating a No Deal Brexit in June 2016. For every one you find, I'll post 10 of others promoting various forms of deal.
It's a very fluid situation, it may well be that the longer it goes on, the more people will want a no deal
Great. Then put it to a referendum.
-
We've had one, we're leaving
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
-
The thing about revoking Article 50 - it is a really bad thing for the Govt to do without a GE or Ref2 to underpin it. But...given the stupidly dangerous game that May is playing, planning a vote on her deal 24 hours before the leave deadline, revocation really does now come into play.
One thing is certain. Leaving with no deal would be the ultimate insult to the democratic process. There has never been anything remotely approaching a majority for No Deal in any poll. No one was supporting No Deal in the 2016 campaign [1] and the fact that a handful of the usual suspects have flipped and moved to supporting it now tells you all you need to know about their respect for democracy.
So, if we're faced with crashing out with No Deal next Friday, a vote to revoke A50 might be the only option.
[1] And before the usual suspects in here start bleating that everyone who voted Leave in 2016 wanted No Deal and knew what they were voting for, here's a challenge. Go back and find a clip of ANY prominent Brexiter advocating a No Deal Brexit in June 2016. For every one you find, I'll post 10 of others promoting various forms of deal.
It's a very fluid situation, it may well be that the longer it goes on, the more people will want a no deal
Great. Then put it to a referendum.
We've had one.
We've also had a general election where the vast majority of people voted for parties in which their manifesto stated that they would hold up the result of the referendum.
The British public have had their only say which they have in their vote. Parliament refuse to accept the will of the people and also refuse to accept TM's deal so therefore we will leave (not crash out, more scaremongering talk) on March 29th as voted for by parliament.
It couldn't be more simple, unless you do not respect democracy.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
You've spoken to them? All of them?
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
You've spoken to them? All of them?
No, but 17.4 million of them said so when they voted.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
It's more than voted remain. If people can't be bothered to vote they shouldn't complain at the outcome.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
Therefore parliament should support TM's deal, problem solved.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
Therefore parliament should support TM's deal, problem solved.
Why? They didn't vote for TM's deal.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
Therefore parliament should support TM's deal, problem solved.
Why? They didn't vote for TM's deal.
Because they voted to leave the EU on March, 29th and both Conservative and Liebour stood on a manifesto supporting leave.
-
They didn't vote to leave on any set date, actually. The Prime Minister set that date out with no idea what Brexit would actually look like and then proceeded to spend 2 years doing f**k all to remedy that, instead getting bogged down in trying unsuccessfully to unite her pathetic party.
May's Deal is a shambles, No Deal is a disaster. Nobody really wants either of these things, and anybody that thinks they want No Deal truly does not understand what that actually means in reality.
The government have allowed this country to fall into a true crisis. Completely shambolic.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
Therefore parliament should support TM's deal, problem solved.
Why? They didn't vote for TM's deal.
Because they voted to leave the EU on March, 29th and both Conservative and Liebour stood on a manifesto supporting leave.
But they didn't vote for TM's deal. In fact, they really didn't know what they were voting for because it wasn't specified on the voting paper. Several options were openly promoted by the leave campaigns prior to the vote, none of which equate to anything like TM's deal. So suggesting they should simply support something they didn't vote for, without asking them, is rather silly. And there was no date specified on the ballot paper as the result couldn't have been pre-empted.
-
And I'll say again because it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Leaving with No Deal would be the biggest miscarriage of natural justice in our political history.
Fortunately, it won't happen.
In your opinion. Fortunately most of Britain disagree with you.
17.4million isn't even a third of the population?
And 17.4 million don't want no deal. They voted leave, not no deal.
Therefore parliament should support TM's deal, problem solved.
Why? They didn't vote for TM's deal.
Because they voted to leave the EU on March, 29th and both Conservative and Liebour stood on a manifesto supporting leave.
But they didn't vote for TM's deal. In fact, they really didn't know what they were voting for because it wasn't specified on the voting paper. Several options were openly promoted by the leave campaigns prior to the vote, none of which equate to anything like TM's deal. So suggesting they should simply support something they didn't vote for, without asking them, is rather silly. And there was no date specified on the ballot paper as the result couldn't have been pre-empted.
Both Conservative and Labour stood at the GE as supporting Brexit. The vast bulk of people who could be bothered to vote supported these parties which is a validation of the referendum result. If they didn't agree with that they should have voted for some other anti Brexit nut jobs like the Liberals.
-
I just must ask you again and it may be third time lucky if you answer
You described the other day - MPs etc - wanting to ignore the Referendum Result as Traitorous b******s - and I asked if you meant the Tory MPs (mainly) who did not respect the 1976 Result or the 2016 one
I asked because I am sure you have read that the vote to Remain in 1976 was 66% v 34 % very roughly
In 2016 the Vote was 52% v 48% to Leave very roughly
That means the Majority in 1976 was around 8 Times bigger (to Remain) than 2016 (to Leave) but the 76 Result was never respected from then by (mainly) Tory MPs till they eventually got a Second Referendum
So if we do get another Referendum it WILL make it best of 3 - so which are the traitorous Bs ?
-
I just must ask you again and it may be third time lucky if you answer
You described the other day - MPs etc - wanting to ignore the Referendum Result as Traitorous b******s - and I asked if you meant the Tory MPs (mainly) who did not respect the 1976 Result or the 2016 one
I asked because I am sure you have read that the vote to Remain in 1976 was 66% v 34 % very roughly
In 2016 the Vote was 52% v 48% to Leave very roughly
That means the Majority in 1976 was around 8 Times bigger (to Remain) than 2016 (to Leave) but the 76 Result was never respected from then by (mainly) Tory MPs till they eventually got a Second Referendum
So if we do get another Referendum it WILL make it best of 3 - so which are the traitorous Bs ?
Anyone trying to stop us leaving.
-
So I voted Leave in 1976 so the people who thwarted that are traitorous b*****s by your definition. And yet here we are almost out despite such a massive majority in 76 to stay
At least I am consistent in picking the wrong Horse having voted to Remain in 2016
For the record I hope to get a third vote soon and will of course Vote Remain again. Third time lucky for me perhaps
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
It's getting a bit crowded in this bunker...... over 1 million in here now!
Website now "down for Maintenance". We know about it is says.
Hope when it comes back the 1,090,000 people who have signed it are still there ! Cant think there would be any skulduggery wuld there
Oh and just counted Leave means Leave leaving the Red Lion and there were 62
-
696,204 signatures on the Petition now to Revoke Article 50
Site keeps crashing as around 4000 people a minute are adding their names. It takes 100,000 signatures to "request" Parliament to consider whether to debate it - and will be largely useless if they dont find time to decide whether to daebate it and / or dont find the time to do so
Let's see if it gets anywhere near 17.5 million.
If course we all know it won't.
Pointless exercise.
Means FA. 17.4 million when it counted though. Brexit is coming.
The remainers with this petition remind me of Hitler sat in his bunker with the Red Army knocking at the door insisting he will still win the war!
It's getting a bit crowded in this bunker...... over 1 million in here now!
Website now "down for Maintenance". We know about it is says.
Hope when it comes back the 1,090,000 people who have signed it are still there ! Cant think there would be any skulduggery wuld there
Oh and just counted Leave means Leave leaving the Red Lion and there were 62
-
We certainly will see - when someone gets their ar**s in gear one way or another
We will Leave or we will Remain
Thats my final word on this subject because it is boring as f***. Here is my Reply # 2054 which I will post again as I close the door. Up the Remainers hope you pull it off
The sad thing for us as a Nation is that the Vote was not decisive enough.
It may have produced a majority called "large massive or overwhelming" but in truth it was almost 50 50 and that means division.
Cameron should have put a tariff on saying we are in the Eu. and tonleave we must have a majority of say 60 or 66 per cent to trigger a Leave vote
There was no such tariff on the 1976 Referendum but that ended 66-34 in favour of Remain and though I voted Leave I dont remember any great outcry ... and that partly was down to the majority of 33 per cent. I actually went years before I met someone that had voted to Remain because it was a done deal , agreed , just get on with it
This time its virtually man v man woman v woman and it wont end here or any time soon
Mainly Tory MPs even though flying in the face of the 76 majority have conspired againt its result but finally wrestled a Referendum out of Cameron and so I AM SURE that if we do leave eventually there will be immediate and sustained pressure to rejoin. It wont happen in my lifetime I suspect but I think it will eventually come full circle to the point of us wanting to rejoin the EU (in whatever form it then takes)
SLAG me if you like but I will never know because I wont open this Thread again
-
The EU has agreed an extension to 22nd May conditional on the Deal being passed by Parliament. So there isn't much chance of an extension then!
The options are narrowing to No Deal or Revoke.
-
The EU has agreed an extension to 22nd May conditional on the Deal being passed by Parliament. So there isn't much chance of an extension then!
The options are narrowing to No Deal or Revoke.
And as usual May has played a blinder by completely pissing off just about everyone in the Commons 24 hours beforehand. That's how to get support!
-
It's a bit like being on a hamster wheel isn't it? Same facts pointed out over and over and over again, then ignored.
AL.
I'll say it again. Nigel Farage and many others said repeatedly during the 2016 campaign that we should look at the relationship Norway had with the EU.
I'd accept that as a compromise. It's not what I want but I would accept it. It would mean us leaving the EU. It would honour the 2016 result.
Would you accept that deal?
-
The "end-game" here will be 30 Tory Europhiles (Soubry etc) having to make a choice between "no deal" or bringing down their own goverment. There will be twists and turns over the next few weeks, but that is what the final outcome will be based on.
I'm just going to leave this here from back in January. BST said I was talking bullshit.
Deal is rejected for a third time next week. Either the EU offer a longer extension or alternatively we find ourselves heading for no deal. Under those circumstances a vote of no confidence in the government will be tabled by Corbyn. And then it boils down to how those pre-reman Tories vote. Do they bring down their own government or do they allow no deal.
-
The EU has agreed an extension to 22nd May conditional on the Deal being passed by Parliament. So there isn't much chance of an extension then!
The options are narrowing to No Deal or Revoke.
And as usual May has played a blinder by completely pissing off just about everyone in the Commons 24 hours beforehand. That's how to get support!
It's worse than that Glyn. By framing it as Her Deal vs. No Deal she's removed any incentive for the ERG to hold their noses and vote for her deal. She's totally useless and if the Cabinet had any members with backbones they'd tell her to go.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-hundreds-of-gagging-orders-taken-out-by-government-11671933
There’s simething very sinister going on below the surface
-
The "end-game" here will be 30 Tory Europhiles (Soubry etc) having to make a choice between "no deal" or bringing down their own goverment. There will be twists and turns over the next few weeks, but that is what the final outcome will be based on.
I'm just going to leave this here from back in January. BST said I was talking bullshit.
Deal is rejected for a third time next week. Either the EU offer a longer extension or alternatively we find ourselves heading for no deal. Under those circumstances a vote of no confidence in the government will be tabled by Corbyn. And then it boils down to how those pre-reman Tories vote. Do they bring down their own government or do they allow no deal.
Well said Tommy. At long last, a post of common sense, telling it exactly the way it is.
-
Hold on...
https://mobile.twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1108800898027929602?p=v
-
Tommy
If Corbyn does that, it will be utterly irresponsible.
In the scenario you give, the think for Parliament to do is to take control and insist on a longer extension. Playing Russian Roulette with a NC vote which could backfire and take us into No Deal would be beyond stupid.
-
Tommy
For the record, I didn't say you were talking bullshit. In fact I didn't reply to that specific post.
Go back and have a look. My post shortly after yours was aimed at Boomstick (BS for short).
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg829859#msg829859
That misunderstanding has brought a much-needed smile to my face, an hour after I've just come within inches of being killed by some Kitson in a Transit van overtaking a cyclist on a blind bend. I bet he voted Leave an all.
It may well be that some of the Tory MPs do choose to vote to bring down the Govt. But if Corbyn is going to go that route at the 11th hour, he'd better be damn sure he's got the votes to win that NC motion.
-
Bet that's been a fun discussion...
https://mobile.twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1108769995276861440
-
It seems Theresa DOES have a Plan B. But it isn't good news. Still think it might be bluff though.
https://mobile.twitter.com/isaby/status/1108808844908605440/photo/1
-
Take your pick TRB
She's either away with the fairies, or she is the worst bluffer in history.
-
Take your pick TRB
She's either away with the fairies, or she is the worst bluffer in history.
Live from the Guardian:
My colleagues Rowena Mason and Dan Sabbagh have also been looking at what Theresa May might do if her deal gets voted down. And, like the Financial Times (see 7.09pm), they have concluded that the evidence is pointing towards no deal.
Here is how their story starts.
Cabinet ministers believe there is now a real risk of a no-deal Brexit, with sources close to them describing the mood in government as depressing and No 10 as “run by lunatics”.
Senior members of the cabinet from both sides of the Brexit argument are understood to think the chances of the UK leaving without a deal have substantially increased after the prime minister set herself against a longer extension to article 50.
One aide to a cabinet minister said No 10 was in “full-on bunker mode” and the prime minister’s speech from Downing Street showed “they have all taken leave of their senses”.
Another soft-Brexit cabinet source described the mood as “depressing” and said of no deal: “The risk is now very real.”
And this is from her colleagues!!!!!!!
-
Take your pick TRB
She's either away with the fairies, or she is the worst bluffer in history.
Well, we know she couldn't negotiate her way out of a paper bag so I doubt her bluffing skills amount to much.
What gets me is why the Cabinet isn't up in arms about her behaviour? Ok, there will be positioning by those who want to succeed her but there are plenty who don't seem to have leadership ambitions.
-
Isn't it the opposite Billy? She has been bluffing for 3 years that No Deal is an option. Now when her deal is set to fail it appears that the bluff wasn't a bluff but is actually what she is set on happening now.
It's in this situation that Tommy's scenario comes to pass. If her deals fails next week and nothing else has been put in place before it comes to pass, the only - the only - way that parliament can stop a no deal is to call a vote of confidence.
-
Does 80% of the Tory Party membership want No Deal help with your question TRB?
-
1.3 million and counting
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
-
Bet that's been a fun discussion...
https://mobile.twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1108769995276861440
I say "fun". Apparently it was just one sided.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1108772332896702466
-
Isn't it the opposite Billy? She has been bluffing for 3 years that No Deal is an option. Now when her deal is set to fail it appears that the bluff wasn't a bluff but is actually what she is set on happening now.
It's in this situation that Tommy's scenario comes to pass. If her deals fails next week and nothing else has been put in place before it comes to pass, the only - the only - way that parliament can stop a no deal is to call a vote of confidence.
Yeah. I'll take that as an absolute utter last ditch tactic. Absolutely must NOT be a tactic to aim for though, unless Corbyn is 100% certain that he has the votes.
Here's a thought though. Let's assume a realistic scenario.
EU tell us tonight that we can have a short extension only if May's deal passes next week.
May's deal is defeated next Thursday.
We have a NC vote next Friday and the Govt is brought down.
How does that stop us crashing out at 11pm next Friday?
-
Does 80% of the Tory Party membership want No Deal help with your question TRB?
Possibly, but the likes of Rudd, Gauke and Clark have let it be known that they think No Deal would be a disaster. Time for them to put their money where their mouths are surely?
-
Project Fear?
Disconnected elites?
https://mobile.twitter.com/FrancesOGrady/status/1108726253849378816
-
Isn't it the opposite Billy? She has been bluffing for 3 years that No Deal is an option. Now when her deal is set to fail it appears that the bluff wasn't a bluff but is actually what she is set on happening now.
It's in this situation that Tommy's scenario comes to pass. If her deals fails next week and nothing else has been put in place before it comes to pass, the only - the only - way that parliament can stop a no deal is to call a vote of confidence.
Yeah. I'll take that as an absolute utter last ditch tactic. Absolutely must NOT be a tactic to aim for though, unless Corbyn is 100% certain that he has the votes.
Here's a thought though. Let's assume a realistic scenario.
EU tell us tonight that we can have a short extension only if May's deal passes next week.
May's deal is defeated next Thursday.
We have a NC vote next Friday and the Govt is brought down.
How does that stop us crashing out at 11pm next Friday?
In that scenario wouldn't Corbyn have an opportunity to form a Government? He could then try to Revoke Article 50, then resign and call a General Election. Labour could pledge another Referendum.
Unlikely but these days I would rule nothing out.
-
In 10 hours?
I suppose it's just about possible. But it's stretching credulity to think that Tories would put Corbyn in power even for half a day. Plus, the Queen would have to be available and in agreement.
Realistically, I just don't see things happening quickly enough to allow No Deal to be stopped in those circumstances.
-
I can't see either the EU giving an extension with those conditions (which appears to be what they are discussing right now) or the HoC allowing her to hold the deal on Thursday with that cliff edge.
But if they did and it happens as you say - then the EU suspend article 50 until the outcome of the GE.
-
Brexit Outcome Probabilities:
People's Vote: 25%
General Election: 25%
No Deal: 24%
Revoke A50: 12%
Long Delay: 12%
May's Deal: 2%
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1108805864067162114
That's the will of the people TM was appealing to last night
-
But. Looks like the issue is being kicked a week down the road by the EU.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1108826546888937479
Just pause for a moment to take in the extent of this national humiliation.
This meeting was supposed to be finished 3 hours ago.
Our PM, the f**king Prime Minister of Great Britain and NI, has gone to the EU to tell them that her only policy is to once more try to get a vote on a deal that hasn't a prayer of being passed. Not least because of her extraordinarily misjudged on-screen nervous breakdown last night.
The EU leaders KNOW it can't pass.
So they've asked May, the f**king Prime Minister of Great Britain and NI what her contingency plan is.
And May, the f**king Prime Minister of Great Britain and NI has sat there tight-lipped and said nothing.
So the EU leaders are doing the job for us. They are giving out Parliament one more week to sort it's self out and save us from No Deal.
This week will be talked about in history books in 300 years time as as big a national humiliation as Suez. The moment when a delusional PM with over-inflated ideas of personal and national greatness, massively misjudged their hand and was slapped down by grown ups from other countries.
It is beyond heartbreaking that a combination of lying spivs and the worst PM in history have taken the country to this point.
-
Tommy
For the record, I didn't say you were talking bullshit. In fact I didn't reply to that specific post.
Go back and have a look. My post shortly after yours was aimed at Boomstick (BS for short).
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg829859#msg829859
That misunderstanding has brought a much-needed smile to my face, an hour after I've just come within inches of being killed by some Kitson in a Transit van overtaking a cyclist on a blind bend. I bet he voted Leave an all.
It may well be that some of the Tory MPs do choose to vote to bring down the Govt. But if Corbyn is going to go that route at the 11th hour, he'd better be damn sure he's got the votes to win that NC motion.
My apologies BST. I did indeed think you had said I was talking bullshit! I did think it was a bit strong at the time haha!
On the point about Corbyn being irresponsible enough to call the vote of no confidence, this is the man who allegedly stormed out of a party leaders meeting last night because Chuka was present. I wouldn't put anything past him.
On the point about how bringing down the government would help stop no deal, I genuinely feel that this is going down to the absolute wire next Friday. As in the last few hours. I could see the offer of a very long extension being put forward by the EU at the very very last minute under those circumstances.
-
Wilts
What's the legal mechanism for the EU to suspend A50?
-
Tommy
No problem. For the record again, I would never call anything you say "bullshit" because it is always thought provoking and considered.
I responded too hastily about the NC idea. I agree it would be a final throw of the dice. But as I've said just now, I do t see how that would give a mechanism to stop No Deal.
In that scenario, with the Govt brought down next Friday evening, who would be empowered to ask the EU for a long extension before the deadline?
That's the key point as I said to Wilts. The EU cannot impose an extension. The UK Govt has to ask for one. That requires us to have a functioning Govt.
My best guess at the moment is that there's going to be a Cabinet coup next week after her deal is defeated again. The very few No Deal Cabinet supporters will be put aside and the more sane heads (relative, I know) will insist that May sees sense and calls for a long extension. If Hammond, Hunt, Rudd, Liddington etc all threatened to resign, that might finally crack her.
-
EU is seemingly going to offer a two tier extension.
-
Sounds like her Chief Whip is ready to throw the towel in
-
Just about to say the same Filo.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-21/has-the-prime-minister-cracked-her-chief-whip/
That's her done then.
-
As I was saying.
The abject humiliation of our country.
https://mobile.twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1108831069292367875?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108831069292367875&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47614151
Brought to you by May, Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg and Farage.
Patriots my f**king arse.
-
Wilts
What's the legal mechanism for the EU to suspend A50?
The ECJ made a ruling in December that Article 50 could be unilaterally revoked. The Vienna Convention allows that a unilateral change to an international treaty can be made 'where the situation has changed so drastically, that the obligations of a signatory have been radically transformed'.
So who therefore is top stop the EU Council suspending their own laws? Who would take them to the ECJ, Farage?
As I said before tho, its a pointless discussion. Why would the EU put themselves in that position? And the HoC has already ordered TM to get an extension - which she then has to bring to the HoC on Monday.
-
Wilts
It would be a constitutional outrage and legally out of the question for the EU to TELL the UK that we weren't leaving at 11pm on 29 March.
-
Still amid all this mayhem its good to know that at least some people have got things under control.
In case of no deal next week the MOD have set up a planning team in a nuclear bunker. A. Nuclear. Bunker.
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-military-steps-up-preparations-in-case-of-no-deal-11671941
-
Once again. As I was saying. National humiliation
https://mobile.twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1108830556178079750?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108830556178079750&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47614151
-
Wilts
It would be a constitutional outrage and legally out if the question for the EU to TELL the UK that we weren't leaving at 11pm on 29 March.
I think you will find (when the books come out in 6 months time) that is exactly what they are discussing right now...
-
Isn't it the opposite Billy? She has been bluffing for 3 years that No Deal is an option. Now when her deal is set to fail it appears that the bluff wasn't a bluff but is actually what she is set on happening now.
It's in this situation that Tommy's scenario comes to pass. If her deals fails next week and nothing else has been put in place before it comes to pass, the only - the only - way that parliament can stop a no deal is to call a vote of confidence.
Yeah. I'll take that as an absolute utter last ditch tactic. Absolutely must NOT be a tactic to aim for though, unless Corbyn is 100% certain that he has the votes.
Here's a thought though. Let's assume a realistic scenario.
EU tell us tonight that we can have a short extension only if May's deal passes next week.
May's deal is defeated next Thursday.
We have a NC vote next Friday and the Govt is brought down.
How does that stop us crashing out at 11pm next Friday?
A quick call to the EU for an extra emergency extension to allow for the ensuing General Election.
-
It’s obvious to me she’s lost the plot, something needs adding to Erskine May to enable the HoC to remove a mentally unstable PM
-
Glyn
A quick call from whom? Who would have the authority to make that call?
-
Tommy
No problem. For the record again, I would never call anything you say "bullshit" because it is always thought provoking and considered.
I responded too hastily about the NC idea. I agree it would be a final throw of the dice. But as I've said just now, I do t see how that would give a mechanism to stop No Deal.
In that scenario, with the Govt brought down next Friday evening, who would be empowered to ask the EU for a long extension before the deadline?
That's the key point as I said to Wilts. The EU cannot impose an extension. The UK Govt has to ask for one. That requires us to have a functioning Govt.
My best guess at the moment is that there's going to be a Cabinet coup next week after her deal is defeated again. The very few No Deal Cabinet supporters will be put aside and the more sane heads (relative, I know) will insist that May sees sense and calls for a long extension. If Hammond, Hunt, Rudd, Liddington etc all threatened to resign, that might finally crack her.
Even if they lose a confidence motion, the government is still the government until the election.
-
Glyn
Precisely. So who makes the call to Tusk and Juncker?
-
So the grown ups in the EU have formulated a Plan B for us.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1108840552722849793
BS is going to look a bit silly letting them fireworks off next Friday.
-
Once again. As I was saying. National humiliation
https://mobile.twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1108830556178079750?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108830556178079750&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47614151
Ooof. That really is a damning indictment of the take back control brigade.
-
Strong and stable.
-
Glyn
Precisely. So who makes the call to Tusk and Juncker?
A Minister of the Crown can do that under the Statutory Instruments already in the EU Withdrawal Act. It's littered with them and allows one to use their discretion to make decisions (such as calling the EU) without having to refer to Parliament at all, they can just pick up the phone.
So they can do it. And if they didn't in those circumstances I'd say it'd be the biggest dereliction of duty since...the last one May was responsible for.
-
Any Minister? That sounds like a path to anarchy in normal times.
-
Once again. As I was saying. National humiliation
https://mobile.twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1108830556178079750?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1108830556178079750&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fuk-politics-parliaments-47614151
Ooof. That really is a damning indictment of the take back control brigade.
What's the betting that she'll still arrive back in this country claiming she's got a triumph?
If she does I think I'll need a bucket handy for when I retch.
-
Any Minister? That sounds like a path to anarchy in normal times.
I think the wording is 'responsible Minister'. So I assume that could cover the Brexit Department, the Foreign Office, International Trade maybe. Possibly even the Cabinet Secretary if it's delegated to a civil servant.
Even though the Government is still the Government in between the dissolution of Parliament and the election itself, in practice the day-to-day running of departments is left to the civil servants because the Ministers are usually concentrating on the election campaign. And I doubt the civil service would countenance a major change in the nation status - or indeed allow anything controversial that can be postponed until after the vote - with an election in motion.
-
Sources have dismissed Theresa May’s plea for more time to deliver a form of Brexit she and parliament can live with as “90 minutes of nothing”. My colleagues, Daniel Boffey, Heather Stewart and Jennifer Rankin, report that, according to a source, the prime minister “dismally” failed to offer any answers as to what she would do if the deal was blocked by MPs again
madame tussauds is said to be the location for the next meeting.
-
Petition should be at 2 million in the next half hour.
-
How can the EU agree to an extension of A50 provided May's deal is accepted when she can't take it to the HoC?
-
2,002,343 signatures
-
How can the EU agree to an extension of A50 provided May's deal is accepted when she can't take it to the HoC?
They can't offer an extension without a good reason.
They asked May what her Plan B is should her deal not get ratified by Parliament..
She kept refusing to answer that question, instead parroting her phrase 'Plan A will succeed'.
I can't blame them making that stipulation, just to stop her attempting the kick the can down the road some more, can you? It's them saying 'it's your problem, not ours, so get it sorted or feck off and stop wasting our time'.
-
LBC reporting that, following discussions with the 1922 Committee, Sir Graham Brady has told May she has to go. No confirmation so far.
EDIT: According to this, she was told on Monday. So she knew this before PMQs and that statement last night.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/21/exclusive-theresa-may-told-chairman-1922-committee-tory-mps/
-
Glyn
Taking a decision to ask the EU for a long term extension of A50, after May's Govt has been brought down would be the biggest political call in a century. It's not just keeping Govt ticking over.
I'd be astonished if any civil servant would feel empowered to do that.
-
How can the EU agree to an extension of A50 provided May's deal is accepted when she can't take it to the HoC?
They can't offer an extension without a good reason.
They asked May what her Plan B is should her deal not get ratified by Parliament..
She kept refusing to answer that question, instead parroting her phrase 'Plan A will succeed'.
I can't blame them making that stipulation, just to stop her attempting the kick the can down the road some more, can you? It's them saying 'it's your problem, not ours, so get it sorted or feck off and stop wasting our time'.
Can't believe Brexiteers have more faith in our own parliament then the EU's, just look at this shambles. :lol:
-
The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the withdrawal agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the withdrawal agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
The European Council reiterates that there can be no opening of the withdrawal agreement that was agreed between the [European] Union and the United Kingdom in November 2018. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the withdrawal agreement.
The European Council calls for work to be continued on preparedness and contingency at all levels for the consequences of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal, taking into account all possible outcomes.
She still has to go Glyn, she is hopeless personified.
-
She was called to a 1922 Committee meeting last night and pointedly refused to go.
Just a thought. Now that she's having a full on nervous breakdown in front of our eyes. I do hope someone's keeping the Trident launch codes safely under lock and key.
-
2,002,343 signatures
It doesn't seem to be refreshing as fast this evening.
-
Glyn
Taking a decision to ask the EU for a long term extension of A50, after May's Govt has been brought down would be the biggest political call in a century. It's not just keeping Govt ticking over.
I'd be astonished if any civil servant would feel empowered to do that.
Who said anything about a long-term extension? They'd probably only get one till after the election result is known plus a bit for the new government to talk to them.
-
The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the withdrawal agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the withdrawal agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
The European Council reiterates that there can be no opening of the withdrawal agreement that was agreed between the [European] Union and the United Kingdom in November 2018. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the withdrawal agreement.
The European Council calls for work to be continued on preparedness and contingency at all levels for the consequences of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal, taking into account all possible outcomes.
She still has to go Glyn, she is hopeless personified.
It's looking like she's more and more isolated, not just from her MPs but even amongst her Cabinet and the Whips Office. If she was an animal she'd have been put down by now to stop the suffering.
-
Glyn
Taking a decision to ask the EU for a long term extension of A50, after May's Govt has been brought down would be the biggest political call in a century. It's not just keeping Govt ticking over.
I'd be astonished if any civil servant would feel empowered to do that.
It's not about keeping the government ticking over. The convention is to maintain the status quo until the new government comes in.
-
So now theres an extension in place, how does that affect the law that was passed saying we leave on 29th March, that JRM was quick to point out after MV2 was kicked out
-
So now theres an extension in place, how does that affect the law that was passed saying we leave on 29th March, that JRM was quick to point out after MV2 was kicked out
The EU Withdrawal Act allowed for extensions to be applied for so now 29th March doesn't apply any more. Unless May's deal isn't ratified by Parliament.
-
Glyn
Taking a decision to ask the EU for a long term extension of A50, after May's Govt has been brought down would be the biggest political call in a century. It's not just keeping Govt ticking over.
I'd be astonished if any civil servant would feel empowered to do that.
Who said anything about a long-term extension? They'd probably only get one till after the election result is known plus a bit for the new government to talk to them.
OK.
Any term extension.
Can you imagine the way that would play? The swivel-eyed nutters on the far right are already up in arms about elected politicians making the decision to extend A50. Imagine a civil servant doing it.
What would his/her argument on authority be?
-
Glyn
Taking a decision to ask the EU for a long term extension of A50, after May's Govt has been brought down would be the biggest political call in a century. It's not just keeping Govt ticking over.
I'd be astonished if any civil servant would feel empowered to do that.
Who said anything about a long-term extension? They'd probably only get one till after the election result is known plus a bit for the new government to talk to them.
OK.
Any term extension.
Can you imagine the way that would play? The swivel-eyed nutters on the far right are already up in arms about elected politicians making the decision to extend A50. Imagine a civil servant doing it.
What would his/her argument on authority be?
As I said, the convention of maintaining the status quo. Even though the civil service aren't in the Legislature, they are just as much a part of the Executive as those who are and have authority of their own on that basis.
-
2,002,343 signatures
It doesn't seem to be refreshing as fast this evening.
They have a bunch of people jamming the votes down a funnel but they can't keep up.
-
7 minutes ago: She address an audience in Westminster, saying she understands MPs are frustrated. “We are now at the moment of decision,” she says and adds that she wants to leave with a deal :woohoo:
-
Glyn
Yes. But. The political reality...
-
And yet another press conference where she avoids answering any questions put to her ffs!
-
Apparently, our Prime Minister believes that people who voted leave voted for pain!
https://mobile.twitter.com/APHClarkson/status/1108852998774632449
Unhinged or what?
-
Speculation that May is going to speak to the Nation at 8pm, to say that she will bring her deal back next week, and if it's defeated she will call a General Election.
I'm sure someone posted that earlier.....
Speculation now that she will just take the opportunity to appeal to us, the great British public, to put pressure on our MP's to back her deal. This is the great British public of whom only 12% support it.
Useless fact. If she appears at a podium with the PM's crest on it - its a statement on behalf of the country and she is not resigning nor calling a GE. If there is no crest on the podium she is appearing as leader of the Tory party and will be calling a GE.
Wilts
Ta for that useless fact. I'd never heard that before. That may be the one useful thing to emerge from all this discussion.
Course, it's a bit like giving the numbers out before the Cup draw. It's f**ked the anticipation when a PM comes out to speak to the nation about...???
-
Apparently, our Prime Minister believes that people who voted leave voted for pain!
https://mobile.twitter.com/APHClarkson/status/1108852998774632449
Unhinged or what?
Not pain. "Pain". As in French bread. Crusty baguettes.
Yeah, alright. That's just f**king stupid and not even funny.
Meanwhile, out there, our PM is lighting the way for the country....
-
Last night a very smart person said...
Picture the scene. 29 March 2519. The UK Prime Minister teleports to Brussels to prostrate themselves in front of the President of Europe and beg for another one-year extension of Article 50.
No-one recalls what the original issue was, but everybody enjoys the pomp and theatre of the spectacle.
And it goes on...like this....forever.
-
2,002,343 signatures
It doesn't seem to be refreshing as fast this evening.
They have a bunch of people jamming the votes down a funnel but they can't keep up.
there is no point in the petition thou, there are just loads of people from different countries signing it,unless I’m missing something?
-
Bpool.
Are you saying that if people from other countries get involved with our democratic processes, then we should discount their effect?
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
-
Phew.
-
But.
Bpool.
There's a map.
A map with colour codes for the areas that have signed up highly or not very highly for this petition.
The map. It shows up high numbers in precisely the areas you'd expect.
So.
If this petition is being hijacked by folk from "Japan USA all over", they are f**king clever folk.
Cos they are entering postcodes that are
a) Valid and
b) statistically spread so that their bogus opinions pretty much match those of UK people.
f**king genius, what these Jap, Yank and whatever folk can do.
-
Yes mate it was very hard I signed it as John from United States lol with no post code, all you need is a email address they send you a email and you click on the link
-
So maybe you should try it yourself before trying to be clever
-
Yes mate it was very hard I signed it as John from United States lol with no post code, all you need is a email address they send you a email and you click on the link
It asks if you are a UK citizen, but if someone reported you I would imagine you could be prosecuted for fraud, unlikely but not impossible with today's technology, but then why would anyone but a brexiteer report you for supporting what will shown to be recognized as the right side of history. Let's hope they don't use source matching technology.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
-
Yes mate it was very hard I signed it as John from United States lol with no post code, all you need is a email address they send you a email and you click on the link
The map goes on post code.
-
As people are dipping their soldiers into the yellow it's nearly 2.5 million
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
And still you all seem to forget an actual bloody referendum......
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
And still you all seem to forget an actual bloody referendum......
Well it's not currently going as you hoped is it...
There's no harm in people telling parliament we don't want what they have to offer.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
And still you all seem to forget an actual bloody referendum......
Are we talking about the first second or the next one bfyp?
-
BFYP
Nobody's forgetting the referendum.
It's simply that the referendum took place in a different universe.
Back in that universe, we had no idea that the negotiations wouldn't be the easiest in history. We didn't realise that we didn't hold all the cards. We didn't know that the experts who we were told not to listen to we're actually right when they said there'd be a big economic hit straight after the vote, that would hurt all of our living standards. We didn't know that the Leave campaign was committing crime on an industrial scale, funded by the Kremlin. We didn't know back then that the current PM had blocked a request from MI6 to investigate the head of Leave.EU because of those links to Russia.
We don't forget the Referendum, but we also are aware of those established facts now.
The problem is, you never hear anyone who mentions The Will of The People, or talks about the 17.4m, EVER address those facts.
I know! It's bizarre isn't it? You'd almost think they are being deliberately selective in their memories.
So this petition is a way of reminding the world that the other folk exist. The ones who think this Will of The People b*llocks is being used by certain politicians to ram through an agenda, on the back of the most flawed vote in our history.
-
All eyes on Bercow?
-
The only weapon the normal man in the street has is their vote. Most of the time this can be seen to have little or no effect.
For the first time in my life after casting a vote I couldn't believe my ears when I woke up and heard that we won the referendum. For me this vote was about much more than just the EU. It was about about everything that has been forced upon us without ever being asked, and the things yet to come in the master plan run by the faceless unelected ones who are running the show. I don't want the Euro replacing the Pound, I don't want a Pan European army. I was never asked about forced multiculturalism, freedom of movement, mass immigration, human rights courts, gay rights etc. All this has been forced upon us without asking. I know many of you will sneer at my comments and call me racist etc, but actually i'm not, i'm just an ordinary bloke in the street and I think you'll find that my views are more common than you may wish to admit. So when I see MP's trying to do their best to sabotage the outcome of the only real meaningful vote I have cast in my life it makes me very, very angry. I will never vote for a mainstream party ever again because it would appear that they are all liars. I think many, many people will also take the same opinion and either not bother to vote, or vote for more extreme parties and this will all be the responsibility of all who have tried to sabotage Brexit. Was it so bad to try and create our own laws, control our borders and try to forge trade deals with the rest of the world?
-
The only weapon the normal man in the street has is their vote. Most of the time this can be seen to have little or no effect.
For the first time in my life after casting a vote I couldn't believe my ears when I woke up and heard that we won the referendum. For me this vote was about much more than just the EU. It was about about everything that has been forced upon us without ever being asked, and the things yet to come in the master plan run by the faceless unelected ones who are running the show. I don't want the Euro replacing the Pound, I don't want a Pan European army. I was never asked about forced multiculturalism, freedom of movement, mass immigration, human rights courts, gay rights etc. All this has been forced upon us without asking. I know many of you will sneer at my comments and call me racist etc, but actually i'm not, i'm just an ordinary bloke in the street and I think you'll find that my views are more common than you may wish to admit. So when I see MP's trying to do their best to sabotage the outcome of the only real meaningful vote I have cast in my life it makes me very, very angry. I will never vote for a mainstream party ever again because it would appear that they are all liars. I think many, many people will also take the same opinion and either not bother to vote, or vote for more extreme parties and this will all be the responsibility of all who have tried to sabotage Brexit. Was it so bad to try and create our own laws, control our borders and try to forge trade deals with the rest of the world?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/21/the-guardian-view-on-theresa-mays-broadcast-a-form-of-national-sabotage
-
A decent summing up of where we are now, although he ought to have included the possibility, albeit small, of revoking Article 50.
https://mobile.twitter.com/afneil/status/1109025842481582080?p=v
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
And still you all seem to forget an actual bloody referendum......
Well it's not currently going as you hoped is it...
There's no harm in people telling parliament we don't want what they have to offer.
Not liking the solution does not mean we should choose to stay in the EU though does it? This is exactly what many in parliament want though, the agenda is swinging back to what politicians wanted right from the very start.
The problem is a poor government not Brexit itself.
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
-
It is our profound misfortune that, just at the time when the country is faced with arguably its biggest crisis since WW2, it happens to coincide with the very time when we have the most incompetent bunch of MPs for generations.
What is desperately needed is people in Parliament with vision, wisdom, intelligence, imagination, courage and gravitas.
And we’re landed with the biggest crock of s**t ever to grace the HoC.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
of course they should have a say but as i signed it with no post code and it took me less than a minute it becomes pointless as i could create hundreds of emails and sign it hundreds of times
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
This. I find our own government shocking and I kind of like the fact that the EU give money to poorer areas like ours. The laws they make aren't bad either.
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
-
‘It's becoming a dystopian nightmare’: readers on May meeting the EU
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/22/its-becoming-a-dystopian-nightmare-readers-on-may-meeting-the-eu
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
So what do you suggest I should do other than take part in an armed uprising? All I have is one vote which I have used.
Whatever the outcome of this, half the country is going to be pissed off. I suppose we could cut the country in half and all the remainers live in one half and brexiters in the other half which leaves the EU. It would probably be easier to sort than what has gone before.
On a separate note, am I correct in believing that after 2022 all EU members have to join the Euro currency?
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
So what do you suggest I should do other than take part in an armed uprising? All I have is one vote which I have used.
Whatever the outcome of this, half the country is going to be pissed off. I suppose we could cut the country in half and all the remainers live in one half and brexiters in the other half which leaves the EU. It would probably be easier to sort than what has gone before.
On a separate note, am I correct in believing that after 2022 all EU members have to join the Euro currency?
Nope I think us and Denmark(?) had opt outs.
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
So what do you suggest I should do other than take part in an armed uprising? All I have is one vote which I have used.
Whatever the outcome of this, half the country is going to be pissed off. I suppose we could cut the country in half and all the remainers live in one half and brexiters in the other half which leaves the EU. It would probably be easier to sort than what has gone before.
On a separate note, am I correct in believing that after 2022 all EU members have to join the Euro currency?
Nope I think us and Denmark(?) had opt outs.
Thanks. Was not too sure about that but I seemed to remember reading something about it somewhere.
-
This is bizarre. I genuinely can't understand what's compelling her to stay on. It's like the part of her brain that feels shame doesn't exist.
-
It's a bit like being on a hamster wheel isn't it? Same facts pointed out over and over and over again, then ignored.
AL.
I'll say it again. Nigel Farage and many others said repeatedly during the 2016 campaign that we should look at the relationship Norway had with the EU.
I'd accept that as a compromise. It's not what I want but I would accept it. It would mean us leaving the EU. It would honour the 2016 result.
Would you accept that deal?
I wouldn't be happy, but then again you wouldn't. If it was that or nothing then I would accept it in the interests of bringing the nation together and honouring the referendum result.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
of course they should have a say but as i signed it with no post code and it took me less than a minute it becomes pointless as i could create hundreds of emails and sign it hundreds of times
Yes. You COULD. And a very small number of people HAVE. But unless it is an incredibly well coordinated effort, the overwhelming majority haven't.
-
It's a bit like being on a hamster wheel isn't it? Same facts pointed out over and over and over again, then ignored.
AL.
I'll say it again. Nigel Farage and many others said repeatedly during the 2016 campaign that we should look at the relationship Norway had with the EU.
I'd accept that as a compromise. It's not what I want but I would accept it. It would mean us leaving the EU. It would honour the 2016 result.
Would you accept that deal?
I wouldn't be happy, but then again you wouldn't. If it was that or nothing then I would accept it in the interests of bringing the nation together and honouring the referendum result.
Right. We're finding common ground then.
What a shame that the PM didn't think of this 2 years ago, rather than interpreting a very small majority in a bad flawed vote as meaning that the country wanted a very hard Brexit.
-
Interesting from Robert Peston.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-22/eu-leaders-want-rid-of-brexit-poison/
-
It's a bit like being on a hamster wheel isn't it? Same facts pointed out over and over and over again, then ignored.
AL.
I'll say it again. Nigel Farage and many others said repeatedly during the 2016 campaign that we should look at the relationship Norway had with the EU.
I'd accept that as a compromise. It's not what I want but I would accept it. It would mean us leaving the EU. It would honour the 2016 result.
Would you accept that deal?
I wouldn't be happy, but then again you wouldn't. If it was that or nothing then I would accept it in the interests of bringing the nation together and honouring the referendum result.
Right. We're finding common ground then.
What a shame that the PM didn't think of this 2 years ago, rather than interpreting a very small majority in a bad flawed vote as meaning that the country wanted a very hard Brexit.
Maybe we should stand for parliament? :) :) :)
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
So what do you suggest I should do other than take part in an armed uprising? All I have is one vote which I have used.
Whatever the outcome of this, half the country is going to be pissed off. I suppose we could cut the country in half and all the remainers live in one half and brexiters in the other half which leaves the EU. It would probably be easier to sort than what has gone before.
On a separate note, am I correct in believing that after 2022 all EU members have to join the Euro currency?
Nope I think us and Denmark(?) had opt outs.
Thanks. Was not too sure about that but I seemed to remember reading something about it somewhere.
Yes, it was just another of those lies papers like the Daily Mail put out to con the public. We always had an opt out of joining the Euro. In fact, we had the best 'deal' of any country in the EU - but then, the right wing owned media don't want you to know that, they'd rather have you believe that the EU want us to give up our 3 pin plugs, buy straight cucumbers, brew lager not bitter, and hundreds of other out and out lies that they've populated over the years.
-
AL
Actually I sympathize with and understand much of what you have said. The world is changing at breakneck speed, econicalky, technically and culturally. I understand that some people wish for a day when they felt more in control.
The problem is that you very understandable wish was weaponised by a bunch of the most unscrupulous politicians you will ever see, and used as part of their war to control the right wing of politics.
You don't believe me?
You know when Boris Johnson came out all guns blazing for Leave? Thumping the table and shouting Take Back Control?
You know before he did that, he'd written an equally strident speech in favour of Remain? He'd spent two weeks debating whether supporting Leave or Remain would be best for his career.
You've been played mate. They've taken your grievances and used them to make you vote for something that will make your kids worse off.
Of course I understand the Bojo and his ilk don't give a monkeys about the likes of us, but other than taking to the streets with an AK47 how else can things be changed other than vote for something that will really make a difference?
The difference being that you voted to give more power to the people who are already pissing you off? Nice one.
But the people in parliament aren't going to be there for ever though are they, and I would suggest that after the next GE that many of them won't be?
But you don't know that, and even then you can only affect the re-election of one MP anyway. But you still decided to give them more of the power you think they're abusing.
So what do you suggest I should do other than take part in an armed uprising? All I have is one vote which I have used.
Whatever the outcome of this, half the country is going to be pissed off. I suppose we could cut the country in half and all the remainers live in one half and brexiters in the other half which leaves the EU. It would probably be easier to sort than what has gone before.
On a separate note, am I correct in believing that after 2022 all EU members have to join the Euro currency?
Nope I think us and Denmark(?) had opt outs.
Thanks. Was not too sure about that but I seemed to remember reading something about it somewhere.
Yes, it was just another of those lies papers like the Daily Mail put out to con the public. We always had an opt out of joining the Euro. In fact, we had the best 'deal' of any country in the EU - but then, the right wing owned media don't want you to know that, they'd rather have you believe that the EU want us to give up our 3 pin plugs, buy straight cucumbers, brew lager not bitter, and hundreds of other out and out lies that they've populated over the years.
Would we still have the opt out if it turned out that we were to remain? I suppose we would as our membership would have never been broken.
-
My problem with that is the inability to independently strike our own trade deals and that is something that is important.
Going forwards politically people have to commit to something soon, it is not that difficult to make a decision. The tories and labour appear to have then not then have then change etc and it is achieving nothing.
-
My problem with that is the inability to independently strike our own trade deals and that is something that is important.
Going forwards politically people have to commit to something soon, it is not that difficult to make a decision. The tories and labour appear to have then not then have then change etc and it is achieving nothing.
That would be my main gripe with it too, but I was answering the question from BST which was if he could accept Norway with his pro EU views could I as a pro Brexit person accept it if this was the only way forward of achieving anything and both sides giving something to meet in the middle.
-
You know how I boringly keep harping on about how the Leave leaders treat their supporters like they are idiots?
Look at what they tweeted yesterday about the petition.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1108733305493614593
They compared where people come from who have signed the petition, compared to where folk come from who signed the petition for No Deal earlier in the year.
Impressive point isn't it? Support for No Deal was all over the country. Support for the Revoke petition is, as they say, just in Brighton , London and Oxbridge.
The unspoken subtext? It's the wogs, the puffs and the snooty bas**rds who are supporting this latest petition. Whereas people like YOU supported the No Deal one.
Except...
Look at the scales that they have chosen for the two maps.
And then look at the reply from Steven Bernard immediately below the Leave.EU tweet.
Like I keep saying. The leaders of Leave think you are f**king idiots who can be persuaded by this sort of mendacious b*llocks. And the Kremlin pay them to do it.
-
No mate all I’ve seen on fb is the link shared and people from Japan USA all over signing it when I would guess most don’t care, so getting 2 million people signing a petition means very little, on many of the posts there saying let’s make this the biggest petition ever so anyone and everyone is doing it
You can download the figures, there's 2 million worth of British based people then a few thousand from other countries, so if a Brit is abroad should they not be allowed to sign it?
There's a handful of fakes on there from people trying to discredit it.
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19 (https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1108790319603245056?s=19)
of course they should have a say but as i signed it with no post code and it took me less than a minute it becomes pointless as i could create hundreds of emails and sign it hundreds of times
Yes. You COULD. And a very small number of people HAVE. But unless it is an incredibly well coordinated effort, the overwhelming majority haven't.
How do you know lol
-
Jesus wept. :laugh:
-
Manchester for Europe 🇪🇺 @Mcr4EU · 14m14 minutes ago
More
just one example that proves Brexit lying again
Manchester for Europe 🇪🇺 @Mcr4EU · 16m minutes ago
Ooh look @MaryRobinson01 5946 of your constituents have signed the petition to #RevokeArt50 already!
( Cheadle MP , talked nothing but sh1te about the 'benefits' of leaving )
-
My problem with that is the inability to independently strike our own trade deals and that is something that is important.
Going forwards politically people have to commit to something soon, it is not that difficult to make a decision. The tories and labour appear to have then not then have then change etc and it is achieving nothing.
BFYP, in a negotiation which party holds the aces, the strong one or the weak one? So, as a stand alone nation a fraction the size of the EU how do you reckon we would make trade deals better than those we already have being part of the EU? Not complicated is it.
-
and if you really think ' mad f@ck ' Trump will do anything other
than @rserape this country , you are very much mistaken.
-
My problem with that is the inability to independently strike our own trade deals and that is something that is important.
Going forwards politically people have to commit to something soon, it is not that difficult to make a decision. The tories and labour appear to have then not then have then change etc and it is achieving nothing.
BFYP, in a negotiation which party holds the aces, the strong one or the weak one? So, as a stand alone nation a fraction the size of the EU how do you reckon we would make trade deals better than those we already have being part of the EU? Not complicated is it.
That's correct pies - look at South Korea as a prime example.
We currently have a trade deal with them via the deal they did with the EU. However they have refused to roll this over after we have left because they believe they can extract more concessions from the UK.
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/a-uk-korea-trade-agreement-liam-we-have-three-problems/
-
https://twitter.com/DaftLimmy/status/1108759153013637121?s=19
-
Looks like MV3 won't happen next week. Indicative votes instead, whether Government-sponsored or arranged by MPs themselves.
I would be amused if none of them got a majority, but it wouldn't help us much.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-22/pm-may-cancel-third-meaningful-vote/
-
Looks like MV3 won't happen next week. Indicative votes instead, whether Government-sponsored or arranged by MPs themselves.
I would be amused if none of them got a majority, but it wouldn't help us much.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-22/pm-may-cancel-third-meaningful-vote/
So much for the 'Plan A will succeed' mantra she repeatedly gave the EU leaders YESTERDAY when refusing to answer their question as to what her plan was if her deal didn't get through Parliament. They must be tearing their hair out at having to deal with this living embodiment of 'a complete waste of time'.
-
:bbscarf:
My problem with that is the inability to independently strike our own trade deals and that is something that is important.
Going forwards politically people have to commit to something soon, it is not that difficult to make a decision. The tories and labour appear to have then not then have then change etc and it is achieving nothing.
The simple fact is we will never be able to strike any independent trade deal better than the ones we enjoyed as part of the EU.
-
Crofty
Precisely. That much is blindingly obvious.
Which makes you wonder why some many Tory grandees are insisting that black is white on that matter.
Could it be that OUR deals that made us poorer are preferable to the dirty EU deals that make us richer.
-
Economists have regularly said the U.K. would be better off under the tories than labour, so going by that bst, why would you vote labour and make yourself poorer? Yes you will find ones that say otherwise but the markets and the majority say different?
-
That's the hypocrisy of some in this thread. In party voting principles are more important than wealth. In the Brexit debate wealth is everything to them
-
Economists have regularly said the U.K. would be better off under the tories than labour, so going by that bst, why would you vote labour and make yourself poorer? Yes you will find ones that say otherwise but the markets and the majority say different?
Do you want to point me in the direction of some of those economists?
-
That's the hypocrisy of some in this thread. In party voting principles are more important than wealth. In the Brexit debate wealth is everything to them
Money isn't everything. Unfortunately short term materialism is rife in the UK ( not digging anyone out on here btw ). For me this vote was never, ever about money and wealth. Laugh at me if like but the pride of nationhood was first for me.
-
When the indicative votes happen (probably next week) one option I expect to be roundly defeated is the Second Referendum. I don't think MPs now trust people to vote the way they want.
I have a feeling that if anything commands a majority it will be Norway-plus or "Common Market 2.0." Whether either will be acceptable to EU is a moot point, as it may involve amending the WA. However before we adopt either it would be good to understand how much they differ from EU membership (other than the fact we won't have a vote in any EU decisions).
The best way of testing would be a Referendum. Whatever Parliament and the EU agrees to vs. Remain. I think that is very unlikely to be allowed by either party. So those well-intentioned folk who are marching today in London are wasting their time and energy.
-
That's the hypocrisy of some in this thread. In party voting principles are more important than wealth. In the Brexit debate wealth is everything to them
Money isn't everything. Unfortunately short term materialism is rife in the UK ( not digging anyone out on here btw ). For me this vote was never, ever about money and wealth. Laugh at me if like but the pride of nationhood was first for me.
Well we're certainly showing the world what a proud nation we are.
-
Just a thought though.
I'm in Holland at the moment. Do you reckon THEY think of themselves as a proud nation?
-
When the indicative votes happen (probably next week) one option I expect to be roundly defeated is the Second Referendum. I don't think MPs now trust people to vote the way they want.
I have a feeling that if anything commands a majority it will be Norway-plus or "Common Market 2.0." Whether either will be acceptable to EU is a moot point, as it may involve amending the WA. However before we adopt either it would be good to understand how much they differ from EU membership (other than the fact we won't have a vote in any EU decisions).
The best way of testing would be a Referendum. Whatever Parliament and the EU agrees to vs. Remain. I think that is very unlikely to be allowed by either party. So those well-intentioned folk who are marching today in London are wasting their time and energy.
Maybe I’m not reading things right here, and I’m not sure who the indicative votes will work, but does anyone think thisis a cynical ploy to split the votes against the PM’s deal?
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/22/secret-cabinet-office-document-reveals-chaotic-planning-for-no-deal-brexit
This is our incompetent governments planning for No Deal. If it were a disaster movie it would be compelling, but as it's reality...................
-
Just a thought though.
I'm in Holland at the moment. Do you reckon THEY think of themselves as a proud nation?
I'm sure they do, and rightly so,but we do or did have a different outlook on these matters than those on the continent of Europe. Maybe the younger generation aren't really bothered about such things but it is important to me, despite as you say the absolute mess that politicians of all colours have made of this.
-
Just a thought though.
I'm in Holland at the moment. Do you reckon THEY think of themselves as a proud nation?
Probably not because Holland isn't a nation. ;)
-
There is a train of thought like that Filo - MP's will rule out everything else so in the end they go back to May's deal.
They haven't yet announced how the indicative votes will work - or if they are actually having them. I think a lot depends on if the government are bringing them forward or if parliament is going to take over.
Personally I think it will be some form of CM2.0 subject to it being ratified by the public in a confirmatory vote/2nd Ref.
-
Economists have regularly said the U.K. would be better off under the tories than labour, so going by that bst, why would you vote labour and make yourself poorer? Yes you will find ones that say otherwise but the markets and the majority say different?
They have also regularly said that the UK is one of the most unequal countries in the developed world and voting Tory will benefit the wealthy and increase income inequality. So I guess it depends on whether or not you think making a small number of people a lot richer or a lot of people a lot less poorer is the country being 'better off'.
https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2019/feb/26/uk-income-inequality-benefits-income-ons
https://fullfact.org/economy/fifty-years-income-inequality/
-
Why do we have a different outlook?
-
Why do we have a different outlook?
I think we have due to being an island race and separated from Europe, we're seperate and different, and also being a former Imperial super power regardless of the rights or wrongs about it consider ourselves a bigger fish than the likes of Luxembourg or Poland. I'm not saying it's a right or wrong way of seeing things, i'm just saying that is the way many, certainly of my generation feel. As I say don't shoot me down because I know it's not the pc way of looking at things but that's why I think we have a different outlook.
-
But you DO realise that a) Holland used to be an Imperial power. France used to be an Imperial power. Spain and Portugal used to be Imperial powers.
That was generations ago. None of us will be Imperial powers again. Isn't it time to look to our futures rather than our pasts?
-
But you DO realise that a) Holland used to be an Imperial power. France used to be an Imperial power. Spain and Portugal used to be Imperial powers.
That was generations ago. None of us will be Imperial powers again. Isn't it time to look to our futures rather than our pasts?
Yes they did have Empires but nothing to match the size and spread of ours. Of course I see that was many years ago and the world has changed. It's just my opinion of why we see ourselves differently and also being an island nation makes a lot of difference.
-
Axholme, not sure if you've said but out of interest what is your preferred Brexit?
-
When the indicative votes happen (probably next week) one option I expect to be roundly defeated is the Second Referendum. I don't think MPs now trust people to vote the way they want.
I have a feeling that if anything commands a majority it will be Norway-plus or "Common Market 2.0." Whether either will be acceptable to EU is a moot point, as it may involve amending the WA. However before we adopt either it would be good to understand how much they differ from EU membership (other than the fact we won't have a vote in any EU decisions).
The best way of testing would be a Referendum. Whatever Parliament and the EU agrees to vs. Remain. I think that is very unlikely to be allowed by either party. So those well-intentioned folk who are marching today in London are wasting their time and energy.
Maybe I’m not reading things right here, and I’m not sure who the indicative votes will work, but does anyone think thisis a cynical ploy to split the votes against the PM’s deal?
I think the original plan was to table MV3 on Monday. Various amendments asking for different approaches would be tabled and voted on.
Now though May has all but admitted her deal is dead in the water. It won't come back but either the Government or some backbenchers will table a neutral but amendable motion.
May's Deal might come back for MV3 later, but only if all the alternatives are defeated, which is not impossible. Although the Government will be under pressure to allow Free Votes on the options, Labour may well whip. If Corbyn whips against the Second Referendum, we'll see several more Independents by the end of next week.
-
Axholme, not sure if you've said but out of interest what is your preferred Brexit?
I would like a no deal WTO departure. I've been on here quite often as pantomime villain for the remainers just to stir things up. If you have too many people on one forum that all have the same views it just becomes an echo chamber of the same opinions. However BST did bring up a good point the other day where he asked that as a committed remainer in the interest of moving forward he could grudgingly accept a Norway option and could I? My reply being that if it helped to get us forward build a bridge between both camps I could accept it.
-
It's House Of Cards on steroids..
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/cabinet-ministers-are-plotting-to-oust-theresa-may-as-her
-
It's House Of Cards on steroids..
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/cabinet-ministers-are-plotting-to-oust-theresa-may-as-her
If she thinks she has to call an election with her deal as the front-and-centre policy on which the campaign is all based on...does she really think the ERG and all the other Tory MPs who've continually voted against it will campaign saying they'll support it? It'd be an even more disastrous campaign than the last one - especially as May won't be able to hide from debates like she did last time because a PM who won't go out there and tubthump for her own keystone policy is going to look an even bigger coward than she did last time.
-
May might want to call a General Election on her deal, but I can't see many Tory MPs supporting that. It would be turkeys voting for Christmas. Probably about the only thing that could result in a Labour majority Government.
I hazard a guess she'll have to at least announce she's going once a successor is chosen. Otherwise half her Cabinet will walk out.
-
AL
If I piece together your argument correctly then, you are saying that, because we ruled India before you were born, you decided to vote to make us poorer.
-
AL
If I piece together your argument correctly then, you are saying that, because we ruled India before you were born, you decided to vote to make us poorer.
He's already said he voted the way he did because he wanted to stick it to a political elite who doesn't represent him or people like him, by taking power away from the EU and giving it to them. That'll show 'em.
-
Maybe meaningless but the petition is past 4.5million
-
17 million have already signed up to leave that’s 13 million more or does that not count
-
If you look at the protests today most of the signs were for unions or against the tories nothing to do with brexit
-
Forget the stream of lies inaccuracies and most if not all economic financial experts and journo's telling us we'll be much worse off financially and the poorest will wear the brunt of it as with Austerity (UK to date has already lost 180 billion) if we leave the EU ..............
What do you want, what would it take to stay and don't squib and say sovereignty or that you just want to leave please explain, just for the record.
-
An interesting point on the March, decent numbers but not even the amount in London who voted remain. Stats eh? Interesting someone said s general election would see labour win. They'd have to seriously go for a vote on Europe or back remain. Do we think under Corbyn that will happen? Where was he at the protest today? It's about the first protest he hasn't spoke at. Tom Watson was for labour and he got booed....
As for May she should go she is the biggest problem. God knows who you replace her with though.
-
the only comment you have on the March is "decent numbers"? 1 million f**king people turned up! The biggest protest in decades along with the biggest online government petition - the people need to be asked again as the majority has clearly switched
-
I find the petition fascinating - nearly 5 million signatures now - especially the map that tells you the area the signatures have come from. And where they haven't.
https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=241584
There is also a site where you can view it by constituency. 33% in Bristol West the highest - 2% in Walsall the lowest.
https://www.livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584
If you think that shows the majority have clearly switched - that's fine.
If you think it shows the country is still just as divided as ever - then you are seeing it the same as I am.
-
17 million have already signed up to leave that’s 13 million more or does that not count
You're so 2016. The leave petition has 450,000.
-
If you look at the protests today most of the signs were for unions or against the tories nothing to do with brexit
So dense. It was literally the people's vote march.
-
I find the petition fascinating - nearly 5 million signatures now - especially the map that tells you the area the signatures have come from. And where they haven't.
https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=241584
There is also a site where you can view it by constituency. 33% in Bristol West the highest - 2% in Walsall the lowest.
https://www.livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584
If you think that shows the majority have clearly switched - that's fine.
If you think it shows the country is still just as divided as ever - then you are seeing it the same as I am.
What the march and the petition show is the passion of those not wanting to trash the country and the numbers can be compared to past events to gauge to extrapolate the real mood, politicians can ignore it at their own peril, Blair is still an outsider.
-
Wonder why the areas that receive the most EU funding are the biggest area for Leavers? Under 5% of the constituency for our areas for the petition.
-
They were cleverly played by the Brexit elite and identified as people being more desperate and more likely to buy into a fantasy where they would magically become better off. By repeating the anti EU lies over and over again ( in the manner Trump ) a group of multi millionares have sought to impoverish the country so they can avoid the EU directive coming in April and keep their stash off shore and not pay any tax like the plebs. It also gives them the chance to make huge chunks of cash as ' disaster capitalists '.
Places like Doncaster would be left to rot.
Probably been p1ssing themselves laughing since the
' Frauderendum '.
-
If you look at the protests today most of the signs were for unions or against the tories nothing to do with brexit
Incorrect but what do facts matter the leave lobby have used lies inaccuracies and illegal methods the whole way I'm not aiming these comments directly at you bpool but it makes it hard to move forward if those mistakes are not acknowledged.
As for unions they are not some strain of exotic alien they are working people working together to try and get their fair share of the spoils as they are entitled to do, meagre as they are.
5,313,835 signatures
Three old white men walked into a bar in Harrogate, another brexit meeting?
-
17 million by April 12th?
-
AL
If I piece together your argument correctly then, you are saying that, because we ruled India before you were born, you decided to vote to make us poorer.
No. I was saying that many Brits have a different view of the world and our place in it than many europeans and that could be as reason why.
-
I listened to a bunch of MPs this morning who were saying they need more time to consider their options on Brexit! FFS, they've had three bloody years! No wonder much of the public has lost patience with MPs.
-
I listened to a bunch of MPs this morning who were saying they need more time to consider their options on Brexit! FFS, they've had three bloody years! No wonder much of the public has lost patience with MPs.
I think it was Letwin on Radio 4 this morning discussing indicative voting and he more or less said that various options could not be voted on in the HOC by ranking them in preference because 'Parliament in not used to voting in such a way'. Well if they're incapable of ranking half a dozen choices give or take in their order of preference I suggest they all go and sign on, because in my book it makes the whole lot of them unemployable in the real world.
-
I know MPs complain about the amount of abuse they, and certainly much of the stuff is totally unjustified. But sometimes some of them make me want to weep.
There's a deal on the table, and no guarantee that the EU will negotiate further. It's a poor deal, but it is because our negotiating strategy has been hopelessly weak. Agree it and then talk about the future relationship. Otherwise we'll be at the cliff edge in three weeks time.
The MPs are like squabbling kids. You have the urge to bang their heads together.
-
I know MPs complain about the amount of abuse they, and certainly much of the stuff is totally unjustified. But sometimes some of them make me want to weep.
There's a deal on the table, and no guarantee that the EU will negotiate further. It's a poor deal, but it is because our negotiating strategy has been hopelessly weak. Agree it and then talk about the future relationship. Otherwise we'll be at the cliff edge in three weeks time.
The MPs are like squabbling kids. You have the urge to bang their heads together.
Agreed, the negotiating by the UK has been shite.
-
The leader of the SNP at Westminster is as thick as mince and wants to try listening.
-
Scary stuff at Parliament right now. May just said that she wouldn't accept customs union membership even if MPs voted for it. f**king hell.
-
Scary stuff at Parliament right now. May just said that she wouldn't accept customs union membership even if MPs voted for it. f**king hell.
She's power mad.
-
Scary stuff at Parliament right now. May just said that she wouldn't accept customs union membership even if MPs voted for it. f**king hell.
She's power mad.
It's always the same with her. My way or the highway. No wonder she can't find an acceptable compromise.
I'm beginning to like the sound of the Kyle-Wilson plan, although effectively it means we won't leave for at least two years.
-
No Chance of Brexit surviving 2 years.
-
Our negotiations HAVE been shite but you need to see why.
May's massive mistakes have been
a) to initially interpret a knife edge vote as a mandate for a Brexit that satisfied only the Far Right
b) then have to move from that to satisfy the EU, thereby losing the support of the Right and
c) to act as though she had enough control of Parliament to get support for whatever she put to them.
Three awful, awful mistakes that have brought us to where we are now.
A grown up negotiation would have recognised those three issues from the start. They defined our negotiating position.
She should have started from an understanding that 2016 was NOT a mandate for a hard Brexit and gone for an approach like Norway+ which would have got grudging support from all sides.
Trouble is, as folk are saying on here, she's psychologically incapable of finding those compromises. She sees herself as the image of Maggie (which was only ever an image - she knew when she had to compromise) whilst really being utterly without power.
-
Conversely a grown up house of commons would not of spent the last 2 years undermining the UK negotiating position. It would have presented a United front to ensure an better deal could be struck.
-
Ldr.
And there's the rub.
What better deal could we have negotiated?
The EU has been solid from the start in saying that if we want a trade deal, we MUST ensure that Brexit doesn't f**k the Irish border.
That requires us to stay in the CU, cut off Northern Ireland from GB, or come up with a magic technological solution.
Unless you assume that the EU was going to buckle on Ireland (they never were, because that would have meant the end of the EU) tell me what Parliament could have done to strengthen our negotiating position.
-
We will never know what could have been accomplished given how things went on, I'll never trust a politician again, likely never vote again (spoil the paper so I have turned out).
As for the Irish border, we have no business being there in the first place. The island of Ireland should be a single territorial unit
-
Conversely a grown up house of commons would not of spent the last 2 years undermining the UK negotiating position. It would have presented a United front to ensure an better deal could be struck.
Parliament is not there to be a united front. That's the role of the government.
The role of the parliament is to hold the government to account, debate things, pass legislation and offer a level of scrutiny and accountability.
-
I'd agree in principal, in this instance though it should have acted in the national interest of getting the best deal possible. Imagine trying to sell your car whilst your other half is telling the buyer everything wrong with it.
-
Ldr.
Right. May said way back that no British PM could countenance any deal that treated NI differently to GB.
So, again, what should Parliament have done?
There WAS an obvious solution. We stay in the CU as an entire country. May decided in January 2017 that leaving the CU was the Will of The People.
So again, what should Parliament have done?
-
You don't undermine your negotiations whilst they are still going on which has happened for the last 2 years. That's what it should have done differently
-
So, again. How has Parliament undermined the negotiations? And what could Parliament have done to strengthen our negotiating hand?
-
MPs sounding off in the press, torys backstabbing, labour and SNP sniping. Everyone has been playing party politics when the focus should have been on the negotiating. Debate should have happened afterwards. The deal s poorer than I believe could have been obtained if a United front was presented. You are an intelligent man, you don't sit at a poker table with your own colleagues showing the other side your cards do you?
-
So again. How could our negotiating hand have been strengthened? If Parliament had agreed to support whatever May said (ignore the fact that that would be in direct contravention of Parliament's role) what could the EU have been forced into offering us?
-
See above, I don't believe you are stupid so can only conclude you are being deliberately obtuse
-
No. I'm not.
Given the position that May took in January 2017, I do not see what possible deal we could have got that is better than the one she finally struck.
The EU was never, ever going to give us a deal that f**ked over Ireland. That's the top and bottom of it. What we did get was the EU going as far as they possibly could by giving May a way out of her idiotic stance on the CU, by means of the backstop.
Nothing Parliament could have done could have improved on that.
The massive mistake if Leavers (and no offence but it appears you're still making it) was to assume that the EU would be so scared of us leaving that they'd cave in and give us whatever we wanted.
That was a massive misunderstanding. What the EU is far more concerned about is doing something that fatally damages the unity of the EU. Like abandoning Ireland.
Understand that, and all the discussion about us being strong in negotiations is just piss and wind.
-
I'm not that naive to think that, we will never know what may have been achieved in other areas though do we? I can't get my head round not doing everything possible to get the best deal THEN debate it rather than pull everything to pieces through the whole process.
-
What other areas?
This is the Withdrawal Agreement that just sets the basic terms.
And the overwhelmingly key issue is Ireland. Once May had decided that Brexit=Leaving the CU, we were never going to get a WA on better terms than we have. The EU has gone right up to its limit in giving us the backstop.
This is not the fault of Parliament. This was set in stone when May was going all Boudicea in January 2017.
-
Meanwhile, who'd have thought it?
The Govt's ex-professional trade negotiator says we'll get worse trade deals outside the EU than we have inside.
https://www.businessinsider.com/says-liam-fox-former-trade-chief-2019-3?r=US&IR=T
Funny how non-professionals like Fox and Johnson and Farage and Rees-Mogg and Gove have been telling us the opposite.
Who do you trust more?
-
The Oliver Left-wing amendment has been carried. Brexit is now over. A dreadful day for democracy. Goodnight and goodbye.
-
The Oliver Left-wing amendment has been carried. Brexit is now over. A dreadful day for democracy. Goodnight and goodbye.
What alternative would you have wanted? A third meaningful vote? This hopefully shows what would get through which IMO will be Norway+.
-
The Oliver Left-wing amendment has been carried. Brexit is now over. A dreadful day for democracy. Goodnight and goodbye.
What alternative would you have wanted? A third meaningful vote? This hopefully shows what would get through which IMO will be Norway+.
I feel obliged to point out to the honourable gentlemen that earlier this afternoon the government (Mrs May) said that they would not be obliged to carry out the result of any indicative vote if they did not agree with them. I wouldn't be cashing in just yet if I were you.
-
I'm not that naive to think that, we will never know what may have been achieved in other areas though do we? I can't get my head round not doing everything possible to get the best deal THEN debate it rather than pull everything to pieces through the whole process.
LDR, If you have not grasped the idea by now that the EU is not going to give the UK as a departing member a better deal than the other remaining (27 remoaning countries) members then I respectfully suggest that you are never going to get it and to take it back to it's origins all those that voted to leave that keep arguing for a better deal noting that we are in the third year of this bullshit never had a clue what they were voting for nor for what's at stake.
Furthermore if any leavers think the UK are the embarrassment of the world at this time due to our position this is nothing to what the UK will look like within weeks of leaving with no-deal or months with any other deal, think of the UK as the Titanic and the 27 member countries waving as we sail off band playing into the ice fields of trade deal negotiations where everyone has seen our hand.
5,647,971 signatures
-
TRB
A tad melodramatic.
What the vote tonight has done, is finally put May in a box and allowed Parliament to take over from a catastrophically bad PM.
What this is likely to lead to is anyone's guess, but if it's put down the hijacking of Brexit by the ERG then it is a fine day for democracy.
-
TRB
A tad melodramatic.
What the vote tonight has done, is finally put May in a box and allowed Parliament to take over from a catastrophically bad PM.
What this is likely to lead to is anyone's guess, but if it's put down the hijacking of Brexit by the ERG then it is a fine day for democracy.
''No government could give a blank cheque to commit to an outcome without knowing what it is. So I cannot commit the government to delivering the outcome of any votes held by this house. But I do commit to engaging constructively with this process,” she said.
A strange coming from a party where the human condom put a vote to the country where no one had a clue what the question was.
-
Mann and Flint voted against.
-
The Oliver Left-wing amendment has been carried. Brexit is now over. A dreadful day for democracy. Goodnight and goodbye.
What alternative would you have wanted? A third meaningful vote? This hopefully shows what would get through which IMO will be Norway+.
I'd be happy with Norway-plus or Common Market 2.0. But that isn't what we negotiated.
Anyway, last night wasn't about other options. It was about Remain-supporting MPs thwarting the result of a public vote.
-
TRB
A tad melodramatic.
What the vote tonight has done, is finally put May in a box and allowed Parliament to take over from a catastrophically bad PM.
What this is likely to lead to is anyone's guess, but if it's put down the hijacking of Brexit by the ERG then it is a fine day for democracy.
Probably a bit melodramatic, yes, but I think this means Brexit is very unlikely to happen.
As for the ERG, they deserve all they get. They have thrown away the chance of us leaving the EU.
-
The Oliver Left-wing amendment has been carried. Brexit is now over. A dreadful day for democracy. Goodnight and goodbye.
What alternative would you have wanted? A third meaningful vote? This hopefully shows what would get through which IMO will be Norway+.
I'd be happy with Norway-plus or Common Market 2.0. But that isn't what we negotiated.
Anyway, last night wasn't about other options. It was about Remain-supporting MPs thwarting the result of a public vote.
It was nothing of the sort.
It was Parliament final losing patience with the most dysfunctional Govt in history and taking control of the process.
-
I accept that the Government is dysfunctional, but the current HoC is even more so. Tomorrow night we'll be no further forward, because I very much doubt any option will command a majority.
The one thing that probably would would be to ignore the result of the Referendum, but I don't think even this shower would have the brass neck to vote for that.
-
I think Norway-plus or Common Market 2.0 is the way forward. A lot of people think they are the same thing, but my view of Norway-plus would be Norway plus Customs Union - hence solving the Irish Border.
I've been out this morning and heard a Tory backbencher trying to explain CM 2.0. The big stumbling block is that we don't stay in a Customs Union and have some kind of "arrangements" with the EU. It sounds like the same sort of thing that the ERG go on about, though obviously without SM membership. The woman really struggled to deal with the obvious objections about the Irish Border. So I suspect it will not fly, and even if Parliament goes for CM 2.0. The EU won't buy it.
-
TRB
I also don't expect an immediate majority for any one thing. But that's when intense discussions and compromises start. That's how grown up systems work.
I'm really struggling to see why people think Parliament is dysfunctional. The 2017 GE produced a Commons that has no majority. That's not the fault of Parliament. WE voted for that.
And then we've had a PM utterly oblivious to that fact, acting as though she had the backing of the Commons, sidelining and ignoring it and making no attempt whatsoever to find consensus. She's treated Brexit as an internal Tory party admin issue. That's not the fault of Parliament.
-
I think Norway-plus or Common Market 2.0 is the way forward. A lot of people think they are the same thing, but my view of Norway-plus would be Norway plus Customs Union - hence solving the Irish Border.
I've been out this morning and heard a Tory backbencher trying to explain CM 2.0. The big stumbling block is that we don't stay in a Customs Union and have some kind of "arrangements" with the EU. It sounds like the same sort of thing that the ERG go on about, though obviously without SM membership. The woman really struggled to deal with the obvious objections about the Irish Border. So I suspect it will not fly, and even if Parliament goes for CM 2.0. The EU won't buy it.
It's deeply depressing that a number of MPs are still in denial about this fact.
It's really, really simple.
Absent a magic technological solution to the Irish border, we either stay in the CU, or we leave with No Deal. There's no grey area. There's no excuse for anyone who thinks about it to be in any way confused.
-
You and I can see it, but they can't. Which is why I call this HOC dysfunctional.
-
But it's only a few who can't see that. THEY are dysfunctional individuals. Parliament as a whole is not.
-
A leading member of the ERG seems to woken up and smelt the coffee. I think he's missed the boat personally.
https://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2019/03/the-moggcast-deal-or-no-brexit-becomes-the-choice-eventually-mays-deal-is-better-than-not-leaving-at-all.html
-
Actually, think what the context is here.
The mainstream Tory position on Brexiters has been that we have to leave the CU (taking back control...proud nation making its own trade deals...all that b*llocks). But as you and I both know (and the MPs know) that means No Deal. Which is a Very Bad Thing.
So a few MPs are now touting CM2.0 with us outside the CU as some sort of triangulation.
But triangulation doesn't work here. We are either in the CU or we have no deal. Simple as that. Binary.
But the MPs know that.
Again, what they are doing is positioning themselves for the inevitable final outcome, which is that we stay in the CU with or without Ref2.
It's just like the ERG saying they want No Deal. They KNOW that would be a catastrophe for the country. But it's about positioning for when this is finalised with us staying inside the CU.
You want a depressing thought?
After all this shit, this is never going to end. The Tory party Euro-psychosis is not going to be healed. It's only been made worse. And the Tory MPs are already drawing up their positions for the next generation of arguments over Europe.
Because, as I keep saying, this ain't really about Europe. It's about who rules the Tory party. The entire country is being held hostage by an internal party power struggle.
-
TRB
NO!
Rees-Mogg has won precisely what he wants!
No Deal isn't going to happen. If it did, and his prints were on it, the Tory Right would have been dead, because they would have been responsible for choosing to tip us into economic carnage. He never wanted that because he's not stupid.
So he's in a perfect position. He can still say to his party members, "You wanted No Deal and so did I. You know I'm in your side." And other people have insulated him from that actually happening.
Now he can go even further by playing the conciliator who, after the nasty, undemocratic, treasonous MPs have taken away the ND Will of The People, can say that he's prepared to try to get the second best position through.
It is SO obvious! It's all about positioning and posturing to the Tory party membership.
-
I actually think the Tory Party will be pretty irrelevant after this is over. Who would want to vote them into power? And their membership is in terminal decline. I agree that they will continue to fight over Europe and whatever deal that we end up with will not please a significant number of Tories.
Hopefully the next GE produces a coalition that goes for PR and these parties will break up.
-
There's less than zero chance that a Corbyn-led Govt would usher in PR, because it would mean that there would be no chance of leading us to a Socialist Utopia.
-
There's less than zero chance that a Corbyn-led Govt would usher in PR, because it would mean that there would be no chance of leading us to a Socialist Utopia.
He might have to offer it in order to secure a Coalition though.
-
But the LDs will only get a slack handful of votes. And after their experience last time, they'll be in no position to call the shots. No other party will be demanding PR.
I'm not happy about that. But it seems to me to be the fact if the matter.
-
Here we go...
https://mobile.twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1110494136392712192?p=v
-
I actually think the Tory Party will be pretty irrelevant after this is over. Who would want to vote them into power? And their membership is in terminal decline. I agree that they will continue to fight over Europe and whatever deal that we end up with will not please a significant number of Tories.
Hopefully the next GE produces a coalition that goes for PR and these parties will break up.
The current parties are irrelevant to the lives of most Britons, they all serve their own internal agendas.
-
It seems possible that May will set out a timetable for her departure tomorrow. I don't think it will make much difference to Brexit though.
-
for example purposes
Sean Matthews #FBPE @microbabble · Mar 24
Voted Leave in 2016 and ever since seen the UK torn apart with hatred. Yesterday, I watched the news as 1,000,000 marched for solidarity with those I voted to abandon. THAT is the country I want back and what makes me proud of being British AND European #RemainerNow #PeoplesVote
-
for example purposes
Sean Matthews #FBPE @microbabble · Mar 24
Voted Leave in 2016 and ever since seen the UK torn apart with hatred. Yesterday, I watched the news as 1,000,000 marched for solidarity with those I voted to abandon. THAT is the country I want back and what makes me proud of being British AND European #RemainerNow #PeoplesVote
What hatred? From my point of view all I have is a mixture of anger and disappointment. I don't hate remainers. I may totally disagree with them, but I don't hate them ( unless they support Leeds ).
-
I remember someone wanting those they called 'traitors' to be beheaded. But no doubt that was just anger and disappointment.
-
I remember someone wanting those they called 'traitors' to be beheaded. But no doubt that was just anger and disappointment.
FFS. I was on here having a wind up, surely you can see that? This is the problem with Britain today, everyone has had a humour bypass! I wouldn't take most people seriously writing waffle on a footie forum just to pass an hour or two on a quiet afternoon.
-
AL
Have a read.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/100967/tory-mp-receives-death-threat-after-voting
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/760339/MP-death-threats-brexit-harriet-harmen-jo-cox-warnings
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8160403/mp-death-threats-tory-rebellion/
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/theresa-mays-speech-prompted-death-16010796
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41237836
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/30/mps-receive-identical-death-threats-image-severed-head-emailed
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-04/itv-investigation-reveals-extent-of-online-abuse-and-death-threats-aimed-at-mps-in-exposure-brexit-online-uncovered/
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/scotland-yard-police-probe-after-four-mps-receive-brexit-death-threat-letters-a3764901.html
Me, I don't think that's normal or acceptable. Do you?
Bearing in mind that one MP WAS murdered in the 2016 Campaign, maybe we should all just stop and reflect on the atmosphere that the Brexit experience has resulted in.
-
Not pointing at anyone directly , certainly not at anyone on the Forum
Just showing what 'the People' are saying now eg
Kate Wilton #JustMakeItStop #PeoplesVote 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 @KateWilton1 · 1h1 hour ago
A lot can happen in 3 years since the referendum. There have been pregnancies, births, deaths, marriages, divorces. Children have become adults. People have moved house, moved abroad, changed jobs, and changed political allegiances. People have changed their minds about Brexit.
-
There's less than zero chance that a Corbyn-led Govt would usher in PR, because it would mean that there would be no chance of leading us to a Socialist Utopia.
BST,
Labour cannot form a government with a majority without reviving in Scotland.
That is not going to happen, so Labour must aim to be the largest single party, which is difficult but do-able.
In that event, Labour need a coalition partner, ans the SNP is the prime candidate.
The price of that will be Labour agreeing an Independence referendum, and probably departing from the support of Unionism as in the days of Broon.
If Labour see that they cannot form a viable government under the current arrangements, then the incentive to look at PR is there.
The historic parliamentary system is unfit for the modern era. If people cannot see that we will never move on.
-
There's less than zero chance that a Corbyn-led Govt would usher in PR, because it would mean that there would be no chance of leading us to a Socialist Utopia.
BST,
Labour cannot form a government with a majority without reviving in Scotland.
That is not going to happen, so Labour must aim to be the largest single party, which is difficult but do-able.
In that event, Labour need a coalition partner, ans the SNP is the prime candidate.
The price of that will be Labour agreeing an Independence referendum, and probably departing from the support of Unionism as in the days of Broon.
That really would hammer the final nail into Labour's coffin. Socialists who wanted independence might as well vote SNP. Unionists would flock to Ruth Davidson's lot.
-
AL
Have a read.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/100967/tory-mp-receives-death-threat-after-voting
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/760339/MP-death-threats-brexit-harriet-harmen-jo-cox-warnings
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8160403/mp-death-threats-tory-rebellion/
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/theresa-mays-speech-prompted-death-16010796
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41237836
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/30/mps-receive-identical-death-threats-image-severed-head-emailed
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-04/itv-investigation-reveals-extent-of-online-abuse-and-death-threats-aimed-at-mps-in-exposure-brexit-online-uncovered/
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/scotland-yard-police-probe-after-four-mps-receive-brexit-death-threat-letters-a3764901.html
Me, I don't think that's normal or acceptable. Do you?
Bearing in mind that one MP WAS murdered in the 2016 Campaign, maybe we should all just stop and reflect on the atmosphere that the Brexit experience has resulted in.
I can honestly say none of that was me.
People type all sorts of crap online from both sides, doesn't make it right. Best to ignore it and not give the oxygen of publicity.
I think hanging the Jo Cox thing on Brexit is a bit low.
-
AL.
Jo Cox was murdered in the middle of the Brexit campaign by a man shouting "Britain First" as he stabbed and shot her.
Separating that from the vervid atmosphere of the campaign (and remember, it was the same day that Farage proudly unveiled a poster of immigrants that was pretty much identical to one that the Nazis used about Jews in the 1930s) is naive at best.
-
TRB,
"That really would hammer the final nail into Labour's coffin. Socialists who wanted independence might as well vote SNP. Unionists would flock to Ruth Davidson's lot."
That has already happened....this is my point!
Labour cannot reclaim Scotland, so the dynamics of the UK system are forever changed.
The 2 party system is completely dysfunctional in these circumstances, but change to that system can only come through a coalition dispossessed by the status quo.
Some in Labour resist this, thinking (wrongly) that they can revive old patterns of voting behaviour.
For a whole suite of reasons, this is increasingly unlikely...so what to do?
-
Albie
No, that's nonsense. There are currently 21 seats that the SNP hold where a swing of less that 2% would tip them to Labour. Saying that Scotland is lost to Labour is just flat wrong.
What IS guaranteed to lose Scotland for a generation is Labour being seen to facilitate Brexit.
-
People on here don't appear to know an awful lot about the unionist vote in Scotland either. Many of them voted tactically to get the SNP out. In some places, people were very close to toppling them. The SNP are on borrowed time in Scotland, a lot of people - sections of their support included - are losing patience with them. There are a lot of Conservative voters in Scotland who would rather chuck their weight behind a Labour candidate to stop the SNP. It's very divided up there. Ever since a referendum, funnily enough...
-
Meanwhile, some interesting words from Michael Heseltine
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/25/theresa-may-leader-name-only-britain-brexit
-
AL.
Jo Cox was murdered in the middle of the Brexit campaign by a man shouting "Britain First" as he stabbed and shot her.
Separating that from the vervid atmosphere of the campaign (and remember, it was the same day that Farage proudly unveiled a poster of immigrants that was pretty much identical to one that the Nazis used about Jews in the 1930s) is naive at best.
I think we can be sure that the man who did this wasn't a full shilling was he? He had probably been building up to it for ages.
-
BST,
You are turning into King Canute!
I thought you were a great man for the polls?
The position in Scotland has deteriorated for both Labour and Tories since 2017.
Labour is down from 27.1% to 23.1% on recent polling data. This translates into a 5 seat loss carried forward, leaving 2 Labour MP's in Scotland.
Tories are down from 28.6% to 26.6%, a loss of 1 seat, reducing them to 12.
SNP are up from 36.9% to 38.9%, meaning a gain of 6 seats to toal 41.
This assumes an even distribution of voting allocation across the country.
In addition to this, voting forecasts need to be adjusted for the TING group, and possible further division in Labour and Tory ranks.
So while we do not know how robust these forecasts will be, the indication of direction of travel does not support the likely revival of Labour in Scotland.
If you are within touching distance of regaining some seats, as you say, then you would need to show movement towards that goal, not in the opposite direction.
I am not aware of any evidence that the policies you support will add to the Labour vote in Scotland.
-
I remember someone wanting those they called 'traitors' to be beheaded. But no doubt that was just anger and disappointment.
FFS. I was on here having a wind up, surely you can see that? This is the problem with Britain today, everyone has had a humour bypass! I wouldn't take most people seriously writing waffle on a footie forum just to pass an hour or two on a quiet afternoon.
I know you were on a wind up, but you seem to forget that what you write is permanent and can be read by all and sundry - including those who don't know you're a WUM. So you think someone who takes what you write at face value is humourless and it's their fault they don't get your little joke? What a f**king ego you have. Sums you up.
-
BST,
You are turning into King Canute!
I thought you were a great man for the polls?
The position in Scotland has deteriorated for both Labour and Tories since 2017.
Labour is down from 27.1% to 23.1% on recent polling data. This translates into a 5 seat loss carried forward, leaving 2 Labour MP's in Scotland.
Tories are down from 28.6% to 26.6%, a loss of 1 seat, reducing them to 12.
SNP are up from 36.9% to 38.9%, meaning a gain of 6 seats to toal 41.
This assumes an even distribution of voting allocation across the country.
In addition to this, voting forecasts need to be adjusted for the TING group, and possible further division in Labour and Tory ranks.
So while we do not know how robust these forecasts will be, the indication of direction of travel does not support the likely revival of Labour in Scotland.
If you are within touching distance of regaining some seats, as you say, then you would need to show movement towards that goal, not in the opposite direction.
I am not aware of any evidence that the policies you support will add to the Labour vote in Scotland.
When the last election was called, Labour were polling at around 15% in Scotland. They secured 27% of the vote in the election just over 6 weeks later. That's a 12 point swing.
That swing wasn't from the Tories either, they were averaging around 28% before the election was called and they got 28.6% on the night.
Whereas the SNP were averaging 48% when TM called the election and only got 36.9% of the vote.
Whilst this isn't stone cold evidence that the same will happen in any forthcoming election, it is a stark reminder of how quickly things can change when we enter election mode.
Considering Labour managed a 12% swing in 6 weeks, a 2-5% swing in Labours favour in any future election is not beyond the realms of possibility.
We don't know what each party would stand for, whilst we can guestimate domestic and to a certain extent foreign policy, any election in the next 12 months (or weeks...) Would be fought and won on Brexit. This makes the 2 party system more relevant as a vote for anyone else would be a waste of a vote.
I'm with BST here, Scotland is not lost for Labour.
As for the TING/TIG groups, it's unlikely they will field candidates on a TIG platform in a snap election as they are still unregistered as a political party and it's more than likely a snap election would result in most sitting TIG MP's being decimated by their constituents, which only increases the number of Labour/Conservative MPs respectively.
-
Albie
Well aye. Scotland is staunchly pro-EU. Corbyn has been virulently anti-EU for 40 years, and at Xmas was saying that he wanted a GE and would campaign for Brexit.
Hardly surprising that Labour has been going backwards in the polls in Scotland is it?
But that doesn't necessarily mean that Labour cannot win in Scotland.
And, be consistent. If you don't agree with the concept of polls, you shouldn't quote them to make a point.
-
It would appear that with so little common ground anywhere in the UK inc' parliament that another vote + GE is the only way out of the maze.
TBD which comes first GE or vote, and what the vote contains.
My stance for a long time has been is that if May/gov't doesn't allow a vote there will be chaos before a subsequent GE and if Corbyn doesn't back a vote to the GE he will have to go too.
-
At the minute most of the polls have tories ahead so what would it achieve?
-
At the minute most of the polls have tories ahead so what would it achieve?
It would put all the players on notice and those that fail to make the right choices for the country and it's peoples will I think be looking for other work. At the moment there appear to be mps hiding in plain sight following this or that faction, I can't imagine a GE happening without all viable options on the table and no-deal kicked into touch. As BST has said a CU is non-negotiable.
-
Try reading this link, it may be painful for some but it pretty much nails it.
''Amoral and venal: Britain’s governing class has lost all sense of duty''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/27/brexit-referendum-conservative-part
-
At the minute most of the polls have tories ahead so what would it achieve?
It'd probably put the DUP back in their box, at least.
-
BST,
It is not the concept of polling I doubt, it is the use to which polls are put.
They are often used to support conclusions which are not justified on the basis of the data.
This forum is a great example, and many media outlets fall into the same trap.
All polls are limited by disregarding the error bars, ie failure to define the uncertainty range.
Proponents of a particular position use them beyond the time range which should reasonably apply.
Since about 2010, the relevance of traditional polling has reduced. Short term volatility has increased.
It is no longer the primary indicator of voting intention and political strategy, but a broadbrush sweep of where best to focus big data analytics.
Where resources are limited, better to target those to the key groups of voters.
The ability to micro target segments of voters on specific issues via social media in the last few days before a vote is pivotal.
Consider how the Leave campaign placed focus before the referendum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbRxH9Kiy4
Without supporting the politics of Cummings and his work, his use of data is intelligent and directed.
Contrast that with the hamfisted Remain campaign, wheeling out yesterdays men like Broon to trigger exactly the opposite response to that intended.
The techniques used by Cummings and Cambridge Analytica will continue into future elections, and will redefine politics as we know it.
Thinking it is unethical is one thing, preventing it happening almost impossible.
-
We wouldn't need polls to know the actual, current "will of the people" if there was a 2nd referendum. That would answer the question once and for all.
-
Albie
I'm even more baffled now as to why you introduced the Scottish polling figures.
Are you now saying that the figures you quoted are irrelevant because...volatility and analytics?
There IS an established fact here. It's that there are 21 seats in Scotland where Labour needs <2% swing to take them from the SNP. To me, that screams out that Scotland is in play for Labour. If Labour had the policies and leadership to exploit that.
-
Well, if it wasn't pitiful enough seeing May's drawn out public nervous breakdown, here's the ex-head of Vote Leave having his own.
https://dominiccummings.com
-
Simple enough, lad.
The Scottish polls do not prove anything...they are temporary and subject to change.
You have often suggested that because something happened in the past, a similar outcome is indicated by a current poll.
You have argued on here that polling indicators imply conclusions (eg, Corbyn should be x% in front by now) that the data cannot support.
I think that is incorrect.
Just using your own logic to backfill your argument.
Scotland is in play for Labour, but there is a big difference between a possibility of a Labour revival and a probability.
You are focused on the possibility, I am saying that it looks unlikely at present.
The key point is that you do not hang a political strategy on an outside chance.
If you look to maximise your chance of winning, turning possible into probable is the aim.
Following on from Cummings and the implications of his video, should Labour offer a UK manifesto, or does Scotland deserve a different prospectus.
What policy changes specific to Scotland do you think Labour should adopt, and how do these differ from those in England?
-
Albie
You're getting cause and effect the wrong way round in your rush to impose on me what you think I think about polls.
When you say that I have argued on here that polling figures imply conclusions, I'm assuming you refer to the fact that I've pointed out that Labour took three big hits in the polls in 2018 and that those were coincident with Labour dominating headlines for negative and entirely avoidable reasons (Corbyn's idiotic response to Salisbury in March, the self-inflicted anti-Semitism issue in the summer and TIG in December).
What I did in each of those cases was first to consider how they are likely to play with non-committed Corbynistas, and THEN to check what the polling figures said. Not start by looking at the polls and then look for something to hang an argument on.
I agree that polls are imperfect. I agree that voters are more fluid than before. None of that changes the fact that polls give a broadly accurate impression of trends. If Labour do stupid things and coincidentally, their poll ratings slip, there's no proof of causality, but, Ockham's Razor...
"Outside chance"? 21 seats. <2%. Yesterday you were saying Labour is dead in Scotland. That was the reason I got involved in the discussion. I'm not entirely sure how the discussion has got to this point, but in the fog of opinion, I assume you accept the actual 2017 GE figures as facts which imply that, with a more attractive policy platform, Labour ought to be able to have a good chance of making a huge gain in Scotland?
Which brings us back to policy. And as I've said time and again, Labour has excellent and very attractive domestic policies. But those are pointless in the current climate, certainly in Scotland, because the B word trump's everything. And, as I've also been saying for 2 years, Corbyn's brilliant sleight of hand in 2017 (convincing left Leavers and Remainers that he agreed with both of them) couldn't survive the Brexit process. Labour has slipped badly from its 2017 relative success. In Scotland, Labour is effectively giving up the game if it is able to be painted as a Brexit facilitator. That's a conscious decision that Corbyn has taken.
-
Corbyn set to whip MPs to back a second referendum in the indicative votes. This could get messy.
-
This is astonishing for three reasons.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1110883246756298752/photo/1
1) It looks like Tory members have finally seen through the Boris façade.
2) After 2 years of a rolling clusterf**k, Tory members still reckon May is by far the best option the Tories have as PM.
3) The other alternatives...God help us.
-
The whips should be withdrawn for indicative votes on all sides..else whats the point?? You are still going to get the party line impasse weve had for 3 years..
-
Never mind, BST.
I'm not sure you have come to terms with the reach of the Cambridge Analytica influence, and the lessons to be learnt from Cummings, but there we are!
I do not think Labour is dead in Scotland, but the default is now SNP, not Labour.
I do think that on a probability assessment, Labour are unlikely to secure significant gains, and may suffer losses.
So at the moment, it is an outside chance.
If you think that is a probable outcome, you need to consider:
a) an improved and tailored policy offer to Scotland
b) how to compensate for a failure to regain seats in Scotland
c) the implications of that for post election scenarios
Perhaps it is time to come to terms with the reality that the UK is divided into voting blocks that fracture across party lines.
Maybe culture and identity are demanding a seat at the table.
Interesting thinkpiece from John Denham on this theme:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/england-on-the-verge-of-brexit-how-do-we-rebuild-a-nation/
Don't agree with all of it...but food for thought!
-
So May is saying she'll quit after her deal is voted through. Yet another layer of Brexit surreality because in essence what she means is "I'm a failure. And because you also know I'm a failure you want me to go, so vote for my failed deal and I'll go. However, if I fail yet again and you don't vote my failed deal through, I'm staying!!"
-
So May is saying she'll quit after her deal is voted through. Yet another layer of Brexit surreality because in essence what she means is "I'm a failure. And because you also know I'm a failure you want me to go, so vote for my failed deal and I'll go. However, if I fail yet again and you don't vote my failed deal through, I'm staying!!"
Falling on her sword at the alter of the Grand Wizards 😀
-
After all the farce in politics over the last few years, Brexit, racism, backstabbing, dreadlocks anyone who even considers voting for any of the main 2 parties needs a lobotomy
-
So May is saying she'll quit after her deal is voted through. Yet another layer of Brexit surreality because in essence what she means is "I'm a failure. And because you also know I'm a failure you want me to go, so vote for my failed deal and I'll go. However, if I fail yet again and you don't vote my failed deal through, I'm staying!!"
Falling on her sword at the alter of the Grand Wizards 😀
There are now some saying that she's only done this because she knows Bercow won't let her put her deal before Parliament again so there's no danger of her having to go!
-
Brexiteer MPs now starting to commit to this "terrible" deal. F#cking hell. Do any of them actually care about the country?
-
Not enough to pass it though by looks of it....
-
So May is saying she'll quit after her deal is voted through. Yet another layer of Brexit surreality because in essence what she means is "I'm a failure. And because you also know I'm a failure you want me to go, so vote for my failed deal and I'll go. However, if I fail yet again and you don't vote my failed deal through, I'm staying!!"
Falling on her sword at the alter of the Grand Wizards 😀
There are now some saying that she's only done this because she knows Bercow won't let her put her deal before Parliament again so there's no danger of her having to go!
The woman who said:
she won't hold an election
we will be leaving the EU on 29th March 2019 with or without a deal
her deal is the only deal and there is no renegotiating it
the Meaningful Vote would be held in December
is there really anyone left in the country who doesn't treat any statement she makes with a lorry load of scepticism?
Brilliant from Ian Dunt - The Nazi-Soviet Pact of Brexit Betrayal!
https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/03/27/the-obscene-moral-spectacle-of-theresa-may-s-resignation
-
Just watching the Commons live - Peter Bone is stood in front of the Despatch Desk - is he wearing trainers?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/skydavidblevins/status/1111006315973890049
Well that's May's deal finally killed off.
I suppose that means we're stuck with her now. Every silver lining has a cloud.
-
And the most unprincipled Kitson in politics shows clearly, once again, what an unprincipled, self-serving Kitson he is.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1110973254854983681
The moment May said she'd step down if her deal passed, that bas**rd saw the keys to No10 and agreed to support the deal
It's rare I thank the DUP for anything, but if they've stopped him becoming PM then halle-f**king-luiah.
-
Genius.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DuncanWeldon/status/1111008567660822529
Christ up above, can this get any more humiliating for the country?
That Black Mirror episode where the PM had to f**k a pig is looking like a mild diversion at the side of this.
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
-
It's now all but confirmed Maybot's deal is dead. The grown up thing to do is to ask the EU for a lengthy extension and build upon the indicative votes currently being held.
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Maybe their defiance is down to them thinking they have nothing to lose and everything to gain?
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
The map is staggeringly stark. It's even more specific than 'ex-industrial' areas when you really look at it in detail. It fact, you can almost pinpoint five areas where there is clearly very little support for remaining; the black country, the Welsh valleys, Teeside, South Yorkshire and parts of Lincolnshire, and certain towns in Lancashire (Oldham, Bolton, Blackburn, Burnley).
It's points to some very deep issues/divides going on in such places way way beyond brexit and the EU. Divides that are still not being addressed.
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Maybe their defiance is down to them thinking they have nothing to lose and everything to gain?
Do you think a Tory government with more executive powers is going to be a benefit to these areas?
-
What does it matter what I think?
-
But mirrors quite similarly to the actual referendum doesn't it? The remain camp constantly tell you that the whole country is ready to back remain, but these statistics arguably (and there is some debate on such a high level theory) state that in a lot of areas it is not the case.
-
What a surprise.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1111022108233084928?p=v
I'm no fan of Juncker but he has a point when he compares Britain to a Sphinx. Perhaps he should have said "British MPs." I'd love to go to the Commons and in the manner of Alan Sugar tell them they're fired. They have failed their voters.
-
But mirrors quite similarly to the actual referendum doesn't it? The remain camp constantly tell you that the whole country is ready to back remain, but these statistics arguably (and there is some debate on such a high level theory) state that in a lot of areas it is not the case.
BFYP
No. The "Remain Camp" don't say anything if the sort.
-
They're embarrassing in that House of Commons. Hardly any of them seem to give a single shit about any of us.
I feel like it'll be No Deal now and I really don't think that's a good thing at all.
-
They're embarrassing in that House of Commons. Hardly any of them seem to give a single shit about any of us.
I feel like it'll be No Deal now and I really don't think that's a good thing at all.
No deal has been destroyed on two votes in a week. Shocking if it still happens.
-
You need to be a bit calmer RA.
This was never going to be sorted tonight. The process of indicative votes was about getting a feel for what might be possible.
Key take homes?
1) Massive majority against No Deal.
2) Lot of support (not quite a majority) for a permanent Customs Union, which is the key point. If we don't have a CU, we f**k all over Ireland and the EU will tell us to b*llocks if we then ask for a helpful trade deal with them.
3) Surprisingly high vote for Ref2.
Put those together and think of the discussions that will now be going on in Westminster.
Those who voted against No Deal but also against a CU will be from the centre of the Tory party. They are the key ones who are now on the spot.
There'll be frank talks going on with them. If they REALLY don't want No Deal, they HAVE to come to an agreement that allows us to stay in the CU.
But they don't want to do that because it would rip the Tory party apart. And they would be blamed for that.
Which then, finally, starts to make Ref2 look like an honourable way out for them.
This is very grown up politics. We're just not used to it in this country - we're used to parties whipping MPs through the lobbies. THIS is how politics should be.
-
What you will get for the next 24 hours is the hard-line Brexiters insulting your intelligence and patronising you by insisting that this has all been a shambles, and we should press on with No Deal. Despite that being massively rejected again tonight.
-
But mirrors quite similarly to the actual referendum doesn't it? The remain camp constantly tell you that the whole country is ready to back remain, but these statistics arguably (and there is some debate on such a high level theory) state that in a lot of areas it is not the case.
That's hyperbolic.
The opinion polls show a minor, but not significant enough, shift towards support for remain. It doesn't show the 'whole' country is ready to back remain and I've never heard anyone saying anything like that.
The very real issue is why within even that small shift in opinion very very distinct areas of the country (including our own) are still so disengaged from the issue.
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Maybe their defiance is down to them thinking they have nothing to lose and everything to gain?
Do you think a Tory government with more executive powers is going to be a benefit to these areas?
I think it shows any future government where they need to spend time if they ever want to have a country where everyone feels included.
-
The thing is thou bst do you think any of the ones who didn’t put second referendum down today will on another day or is 260odd the maximum they will get and the same goes for the custom union as labour were told to support that?
-
The thing is thou bst do you think any of the ones who didn’t put second referendum down today will on another day or is 260odd the maximum they will get and the same goes for the custom union as labour were told to support that?
Some of the 100 or so MPs who didn't vote tonight could just as easily vote one way or the other without anyone changing their mind.
-
Bpool
Dunno. Funny things happen when folk end up staring down the barrel.
Glyn. I was just thinking the same. It's very odd that 100 or so MPs don't seem to have any opinion on these questions. I guess their votes are the key ones when push comes to cliff edge.
-
It’s a disgrace that 100 mp’s abstained the whole f**king HoC is a disgrace, we’re an international embarresment, everyone of them should hang their heads in shame
-
So May is saying she'll quit after her deal is voted through. Yet another layer of Brexit surreality because in essence what she means is "I'm a failure. And because you also know I'm a failure you want me to go, so vote for my failed deal and I'll go. However, if I fail yet again and you don't vote my failed deal through, I'm staying!!"
Oh it's much worse than the Glyn. What May is saying is 'you voted against my deal because it's shit and it's bad for the country, but you should forget the country, the only thing that's important is the Conservative Party, vote for my deal, I'll resign and the party will remain intact'.
The sad thing is, many will do this; to them the party is more important than the country. Integrity means nothing to these people.
-
NNK.
Aye. But they miscalculated on that.
Now they have to choose between a CU that will definitely split the Tory party, and a Ref2 that will split the country even worse than it already is.
-
Just checked on the BBC site telling you which way MPs voted. It was mainly Govt ministers who abstained...
Caroline Flint, by the way, only voted for one approach - the Labour proposal.
Bizarrely, having voted for May's deal which essentially meant us staying in the CU, she abstained on the indicative vote saying we should stay in the CU.
Odd character...
-
By the way, that serial f**king idiot Dennis Skinner, voted for No Deal tonight.
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Areas where, on average, the less intelligent live.
-
Some interesting analysis of last night's votes by party here:
https://twitter.com/cath_haddon/status/1111172769956458497
But here's the sting:
But it also shows how far to go on any compromise. It’s hard to do so when your preferred option still seems possible. Customs Union would have got over line with SNP votes. But referendum got highest figure so will still be in running in their minds.
So there is still a way to go until they can coalesce around an option. I think we can all agree May's Deal is a dead duck. If offering to fall on her sword doesn't make a difference, nothing well.
-
Re. May's Deal. I actually think by offering to go she made it less likely that it will pass. Although one or two ERG "Big Beasts" have signalled they will or might move, the real problem is the ERG Backwoodsmen like Bridgen and Francois. They will never be reconciled to anything but No Deal.
May's best hope was to peel off sufficient Labour backbenchers who came from Leave-voting seats and were nervous about No Deal. But she damaged her strategy by her speech last Wednesday and killed it off by offering to go last night. Labour MPs don't fancy the prospect of a Tory Hardliner negotiating the future relationship, something I can quite understand.
-
Some interesting analysis of last night's votes by party here:
https://twitter.com/cath_haddon/status/1111172769956458497
But here's the sting:
But it also shows how far to go on any compromise. It’s hard to do so when your preferred option still seems possible. Customs Union would have got over line with SNP votes. But referendum got highest figure so will still be in running in their minds.
So there is still a way to go until they can coalesce around an option. I think we can all agree May's Deal is a dead duck. If offering to fall on her sword doesn't make a difference, nothing well.
Three things jump out at me from those figures.
1) The Tories are against most things and hopelessly split on the others. Yes, Labour has some people rebelling, but anyone who says the two parties are equally split is talking crap.
2) The largest number of FOR Tory votes was for No Deal. Which everyone knows would be the biggest economic calamity since the 1930s. That's what the Tory party has become. No concept of any sort of Brexits other than an insane one.
3) Anyone who ever says, or ever thought Brexit Means Brexit needs sectioning. Those numbers demonstrate what I've been saying for three years. Brexit isn't a thing. It's a basket of possible things. Having a binary vote in 2016 in those circumstances was criminally stupid.
-
Oh aye. And the DUP are a helpful bunch aren't they?
-
I was definitely not calm watching all that proceed last night, BST. With each passing day of deadlock I lose what little faith I had left in these people to actually be "grown up" and come to some form of consensus. I hate the shouting, heckling and paper rustling they all do too. It's very juvenile.
-
I'm finding it increasingly hard to understand the DUP's position. Both parts of Ireland would be the biggest losers of all under a No Deal Brexit (which I agree won't happen). I wonder what effect their stance is having on their vote because whenever vox pops are done in Ireland you don't find anyone who is relaxed about No Deal (in contrast to the ones done in England).
I'm guessing it's a psychological thing, given their tradition of not compromising and earning popular support for doing so. Maybe someone needs to gently remind them that whatever it may be, the EU isn't some sort of agent of the Vatican!
-
Only thing the DUP voted for was a 2 year status quo.
Think about it from their side. They don't get tarred with tipping us into No Deal. They kick the can down the road. And they'll retain their position of power over the Govt. And we're back here in 2 years.
Unprincipled bas**rds.
-
Only thing the DUP voted for was a 2 year status quo.
Think about it from their side. They don't get tarred with tipping us into No Deal. They kick the can down the road. And they'll retain their position of power over the Govt. And we're back here in 2 years.
Unprincipled bas**rds.
My local MP voted for that and also for EEA/ EFTA, which were the two least popular options!
-
5,900,820 signatures
If you look at the map it shows the lowest participation rates in the ex-industrial areas of the UK which are now amongst the poorest, and according to recent reports those hit hardest by Austerity. It's almost as though it is some sort of defiant self harm.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
Areas where, on average, the less intelligent live.
Or the areas where people have to deal with the harsh realities of real life maybe?
-
BST
Having seen three of the more sensible MPs interviewed- Justine Greening, Frank Field and Liz Kendall- I'm not optimistic that Parliament can find a way forward on Monday.
Three different solutions. Greening- May's Deal as is, Field- May's Deal with a Customs Union bolted on, Kendall- Customs Union but not May's Deal.
Liz Kendall did make the point I did earlier on: that May's offer to stand down has made it harder to get Labour MPs on board because they are nervous about who follows her.
It's a bloody mess.
-
TRB
There's a massive context to all this.
If we don't sort out our shit by 12 April, we are leaving with No Deal.
That wasn't even discussed in 2016.
There has never been anything remotely approaching a majority for No Deal in any opinion poll.
Parliament is dead set against it.
If we DO stumble into No Deal, it will be the biggest outrage against democracy and biggest Parliamentary failure fir centuries.
So. The closer we get to 12 April, the higher will become the pressure on those who voted against ND, but also didn't support anything else.
It's now a game of will to see who cracks a d moves away from their preferred option.
Expect this to go on for at least another week. Then people to start coalescing around a CU or Ref2 option.
-
I agree, and the risk of No Deal By Accident remains real. Either Norway-plus (which wasn't voted on yesterday) or May-Plus-CU sound most likely. And of course you could put either of those options to a confirmatory vote.
-
The only outrage against democracy would be if we don't leave at all.
If we leave on wto terms, so be it.
The referendum DID NOT ask if we wanted a deal or remain.
-
And into the time tunnel we go...
-
The only outrage against democracy would be if we don't leave at all.
If we leave on wto terms, so be it.
The referendum DID NOT ask if we wanted a deal or remain.
But only the vocal minority want no deal. The majority think it's foolish.
-
The latest gambit from the ERG, and I've heard this from two different members, is to have a lengthy Article 50 extension. Presumably they believe that May would go, there would be a new Tory leader with views close to theirs and he/ she would reopen the negotiations, perhaps after securing a mandate via a GE.
All seems far fetched to me, and not a little hypocritical given how much they've complained about a two-week extension. Also I doubt the country could stand another 12-18 months of this and we'd have to join in the Euro Elections.
-
TRB
Of COURSE that is ERG policy. As I e been saying for months. This isn't about Brexit. It's about the UK equivalent of the Tea Party taking over control of the Tory Party.
It is SO obvious. Why do you think Rees-Mogg has been in regular contact with Steve Bannon over the past two years? Why do you think that odious traitor, Banks at Leave.Eu has been organising mass inflitration of Tory membership by ex-UKIP members. And the DUP are central to this. They received a half million pound donation that they have refused to explain the source of. It's believed to have gone through Banks's organisations. And he's never explained where HIS money comes from, given that none of his companies makes any serious profit.
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
Outside of the Peoples Republic of South Yorkshire the Labour party are not that popular whoever are running the Conservatives. Even just over the border into North Lincs they wouldn't win here.
-
The most fascinating thing about this entire process has been to see how some people's obsession with winning means they are prepared to ignore treason, they're prepared to ignore being lied to and they are prepared to ignore the fact that we'll do spectacular damage to our economic future.
None of that matters. As long as they get their way.
-
If it was proven bst that the Labour Party has lied would you still vote for them or would you ignore them? All parties have told many lies over the years and I’m sure will tell many more
-
Bpool
Yes. Agreed. And I didn't vote for Labour after Blair lied about WMD in Iraq.
But what no political party has ever done at a GE, is to commit treason to win a vote. And no political party has ever gone into a GE with a policy that their own analyses say will knock £1trn off our income over the next decade.
You want to discount those things after consideration, and still support Brexit? Fine. That's your choice. But if you choose to just shrug your shoulders and ignore them then you've chosen not act like a grown up. And you've given up the right for your opinion to be taken seriously.
-
The most fascinating thing about this entire process has been to see how some people's obsession with winning means they are prepared to ignore treason, they're prepared to ignore being lied to and they are prepared to ignore the fact that we'll do spectacular damage to our economic future.
None of that matters. As long as they get their way.
It seems none of that matters to the PM, as “MV3” is having another go tomorrow, it’s just that it’s not being called MV3 because they’ve dropped the political declaration, I’m f**ked whatdifference that makes to the deal though. I honestly do think we are being run by loonatics!
-
It'll lose by 50+ votes tomorrow. And May will once again insist that it must be passed.
But, oddly, she'll continue to insist that a vote three years ago is sacrosanct for all time, and must not be put to the test again.
-
The Government are using this third vote as a stick to beat the Labour party with (despite the fact the DUP and groups of Tory MPs have already said they will vote against it).
They will trot out the line that the Labour front bench agreed with most of the withdrawal agreement in principle. Once it's defeated, they will offload the responsibility for the inevitable long extension of A50 onto the labour party, who they will say are frustrating the brexit process. This is sadly purely about politics. The absence of leadership will be filled with tactics for how the conservative party can most effectively appeal to the hard line 40% vote leave population.
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
Outside of the Peoples Republic of South Yorkshire the Labour party are not that popular whoever are running the Conservatives. Even just over the border into North Lincs they wouldn't win here.
Despite them having an MP there?
-
The Government are using this third vote as a stick to beat the Labour party with (despite the fact the DUP and groups of Tory MPs have already said they will vote against it).
They will trot out the line that the Labour front bench agreed with most of the withdrawal agreement in principle. Once it's defeated, they will offload the responsibility for the inevitable long extension of A50 onto the labour party, who they will say are frustrating the brexit process. This is sadly purely about politics. The absence of leadership will be filled with tactics for how the conservative party can most effectively appeal to the hard line 40% vote leave population.
Now why would they do that unless they were planning a General Election in the near future? On 23rd May perhaps?
-
Good piece here on where the government went wrong during the negotiations.
https://www.politico.eu/article/how-uk-lost-brexit-eu-negotiation/
-
So with the Tory party going loopy right and the labour party going all trotsky again. Where do those of us that think moderate vote? As I've said before any person who can even consider voting for the 2 main parties shouldn't have a vote. Time for reform
-
Ldr
You won't believe me, but the Labour party's economic policy is bang middle of the road Theory of Capitalism 101.
Any Tory PM between 1955 and Thatcher wouldn't have blinked at it.
It's the Tories that have a wild, radical, non-conventional economic policy. They are still obsessed with cutting the deficit and assuming that all will be well. Even though that concept has been as firmly debunked as idiocy, as any economic theory in history.
But yep, when it comes to foreign policy, I fully understand anyone having concerns about Labour.
-
This is from two years ago, but it sums up the dilemma that the sensible Tories have been in all this time.
https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeanPenguin/status/1111386427147735041/photo/1
Since then, they've chosen not to destroy their own party over not damaging the country.
We'll find out over the next week if any of them are rethinking that position.
-
Happy Brexit day to all x
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
Outside of the Peoples Republic of South Yorkshire the Labour party are not that popular whoever are running the Conservatives. Even just over the border into North Lincs they wouldn't win here.
Despite them having an MP there?
And three figures worth of MPs around the UK... Unless South Yorkshire has hundreds of seats?
-
This is a bus ticket, buy it
But I don't like where the bus is going, take it away
(a short while later)
I have something for you
Is it a bus ticket?
Yes
I still don't like where the bus is going, the destination hasn't changed, take it away
(a second short while later)
I have something for you
Is it a bus ticket?
Yes, but it's a different bus ticket
Why is it different?
We don't tell you where the bus is going until after you've bought the ticket, so now will you buy it?
-
I see the current head of UKIP is as much in control of the facts as the ones who have gone before him.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GerardBattenMEP/status/1111394659551584257
For the record, we don't have any water canons in London.
Boris Johnson bought some but they were illegal. Sadiq Khan scrapped them.
I'm sure it's an innocent mistake by Batten, and if he inadvertently winds up Brexit supporters on a day when fevers are running high and that leads to violence, well that's just be one of those unfortunate things.
-
Happy Brexit day to all x
I still think a second referendum would be the best for the people. Now everybody knows what Brexit means and probably many people changed their decision since 2016 (some would want to change their vote from yes to no, and opposite).
The EU it's not perfect, but no country is perfect.
Since September 2018 I live and work in Salzburg, Austria. There are some things better than in Romania, and some things not, but both countries are in the EU.
And believe me, on TV and at the news they talk more about Brexit in Romania then here in Austria. Here they simply don't care about Brexit and other things outside of their country.
-
Strange how the contenders to replace May are now voting for her deal. The intellectually challenged Raab the latest.
-
Strange how the contenders to replace May are now voting for her deal. The intellectually challenged Raab the latest.
Raad is a real gem. Resigns in protest over May's deal that was negotiated while he was Brexit secretary then goes on to vote for it when the keys to no 10 get dangled in front of him.
-
Strange how the contenders to replace May are now voting for her deal. The intellectually challenged Raab the latest.
Wouldn't holding out against it earn them more Brownie Points with Tory members? Or do they just see passing her deal as the only way to start the contest?
-
Raab was the Brexit Secretary who said he was surprised to find out how much of our trade went through Dover...
And then voted for No Deal, when Dover port is totally unprepared for the chaos that would ensue.
If he's the best we can find as PM then God help us.
-
Still. He's pretty Franklin what he thinks of us, the British workforce.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1111615386678714368
I wonder what he was doing a 1am this morning while I was working on a report that will trigger the funding that keeps three of my employees in work?
-
This sums up Raab.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1111610088723226624
Can't think what's changed his mind. Surely not the fact that if this vote goes through, there's a vacancy at No10?
-
May's deal voted down again. Surely now - this time - the only option is a people's vote.
-
May's deal voted down again. Surely now - this time - the only option is a people's vote.
No deal.
As very clearly stated at the time, the vote was a 1 time deal.
-
UK MPs have rejected Theresa May’s EU withdrawal agreement by 344 votes to 286, throwing UK’s Brexit plans into more confusion.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47752017
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
Outside of the Peoples Republic of South Yorkshire the Labour party are not that popular whoever are running the Conservatives. Even just over the border into North Lincs they wouldn't win here.
Despite them having an MP there?
Andrew Percy is Conservative.
-
May's deal voted down again. Surely now - this time - the only option is a people's vote.
I think there will be a General Election first. Not in May as some people are speculating, but certainly once Theresa May's successor is installed. The new Parliament may well then vote for another Referendum.
That could change of course if a lot more MPs back a Referendum in the next Indicative Votes.
-
Flint votes with the Givernment again, she should be deselected
-
Flint votes with the Givernment again, she should be deselected
How do you feel about Conservatives voting against the government?
-
I think we have just seen the day when the labour party have probably died
-
What happens if we have a people’s vote and it’s the same descion, if mps don’t back the deal now why will they the next time round, the tories that vote against it mainly want no deal and labours soul interest is getting a general election
-
The DUP have just said they'd rather stay in the EU than risk the Union.
Are the ERG going to follow them on that one? :lol:
-
The DUP have just said they'd rather stay in the EU than risk the Union.
Are the ERG going to follow them on that one? :lol:
Well they didn't follow them today.....
May wasnt that far off in her 3rd attempt, she needed 30 more. Could she have got all of her party on side she would have got it so you can see why its held as the Tories holding it back. Not many labour voted for it though and that's something the Tories will use in campaigning no doubt.
It is still a sorry mess.
-
Labour must stand as a pro EU party now.
-
Farage will form a new party, as the old guy said on Question time last night, a life long labour voter, he will not vote labour again and if just 25% of leave voters back him in an election he starts off with about 4 million votes, mostly from labour candidates.
Whether you like him or hate him he is an orator, and will tear any manifesto that Labour or the Tories put together to shreds, this could be the real start of a three party politics in this country, but with an extreme party coming to the table, who will play the nationalist card which is always attractive to the masses.
Inadvertently I think the major parties are inviting splitting the two main parties vote , just what Cameron was trying to avoid.
-
The DUP have just said they'd rather stay in the EU than risk the Union.
Are the ERG going to follow them on that one? :lol: Farage will form a new party, as the old guy said on Question time last night, a life long labour voter, he will not vote labour again and if just 25% of leave voters back him in an election he starts off with about 4 million votes, mostly from labour candidates.
Whether you like him or hate him he is an orator, and will tear any manifesto that Labour or the Tories put together to shreds, this could be the real start of a three party politics in this country, but with an extreme party coming to the table, who will play the nationalist card which is always attractive to the masses.
Inadvertently I think the major parties are inviting splitting the two main parties vote , just what Cameron was trying to avoid.
You're right, Farage does indeed spout b*llocks very eloquently.
-
At least the DUP have a spine unlike JRM, Boris, etc.
-
At least the DUP have a spine unlike JRM, Boris, etc.
JRM only said yesterday he would not abandon the DUP, but he did abandon them
-
Farage has already formed a new party. I think his plan was to fight the Euro elections. They are much more likely to happen in the UK now. I think they will also fight the next GE if, as seems likely, Brexit hasn't happened by then.
The rules for the Euro elections make it quite likely they will win some seats. In the GE they are not likely to win any seats, but they could affect results.
-
Just about to say the same Filo.
Principles, eh?
Skinner abstained again...
-
TRB
I wonder where his funding will come from...
-
It'll lose by 50+ votes tomorrow. And May will once again insist that it must be passed.
But, oddly, she'll continue to insist that a vote three years ago is sacrosanct for all time, and must not be put to the test again.
Well, I've had a shocking run of political predictions, but hopefully, this is the start of a run of better form...
-
TRB
I wonder where his funding will come from...
I realise that is probably rhetorical. I don't know if he's still in bed with Banks.
-
The DUP have just said they'd rather stay in the EU than risk the Union.
Are the ERG going to follow them on that one? :lol:
They are an inscrutable bunch, aren't they?
-
Which raises the question of where Banks gets his money from...
-
They may well gain control of the Tory Party, but in doing so they will make it unelectable.
Outside of the Peoples Republic of South Yorkshire the Labour party are not that popular whoever are running the Conservatives. Even just over the border into North Lincs they wouldn't win here.
Despite them having an MP there?
Andrew Percy is Conservative.
But Nic Dakin isn't - or are you going to tell me he doesn't hold a seat all of which is in North Lincolnshire? Unlike Andrew Percy who has half of his constituency in East Yorkshire.
In fact most of the North Lincolnshire part of Percy's seat was always Labour under Elliott Morley. It only went Tory when that was split up and joined the old Gainsborough seat.
Then again I suppose its all changed since I lived there with all these incomers...
-
Talking about funding...
https://mobile.twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1111683895081226240/photo/1
On THIS day of all days, Vote Leave finally admit that they massively broke the law during the Ref campaign, by giving £600k to that spotty little pre-pubescent gobshite Darren Grimes to spend on advertising over the limit allowed by electoral law.
But hey. Fair vote...
-
It'll lose by 50+ votes tomorrow. And May will once again insist that it must be passed.
But, oddly, she'll continue to insist that a vote three years ago is sacrosanct for all time, and must not be put to the test again.
Well, I've had a shocking run of political predictions, but hopefully, this is the start of a run of better form...
When are you predicting for the General Election? Some people seem to think May. I fancy October personally.
-
I think we have just seen the day when the labour party have probably died
I think it's bad for both main parties, but don't forget that the electoral system works massively in their favour in Parliamentary elections.
The Euro elections are different gravy. The political anorak in me really wants to see those go ahead now.
-
oh Yes. let the momentum of the pro EU movement continue and elect proper MEPs not the criminally funded UKIP wreckers
-
I no the leave camp seem to have overspent but did remain not have more to spend than leave thou,wasn’t it 9.3 million on leafleting ect?
-
Bpool.
That wasn't the Remain campaign. It was the Govt setting out the Govt position. It presented a set of facts. Demonstrable facts.
1) Did you have any specific issues with the facts set out in that leaflet?
2) Because those facts were publicly out there, anyone who disputed them could argue the toss.
3) What Vote Leave did was to pump demonstrable lies into the social media feeds of people it had identified as suckers (their claim, not mine).
4) Because no one knew they were doing it at the time, it was impossible to counter those lies.
5) To pay for that, they broke the law. As they have finally admitted today.
As I said yesterday, you astonish me in your continued insistence if simply ignoring all this, because the outcome was the one you wanted.
And while we're on the topic of them breaking the law during the campaign, this is quite beyond belief. It's Theresa's May's lawyer. In court. Admitting that May knows all about this. And has decided to ignore it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nw_nicholas/status/1108770453789831168
-
I can see an intermediary path. MPs are talking about votes/propositions being coupled on Monday... with negotiating a customs union the most supported outcome. The government could then couple a third (edit:fourth. I'm losing count) meaningful vote on the WA with a commitment to negotiate a firm customs union ... as opposed to the best of both worlds approach they seemingly want that leaves us in the 'backstop' if and when talks for a trade agreement break down. The EU are seemingly willing to do this.
Labour whipped their MPs to vote for Clarke's proposal.
-
I can see an intermediary path. MPs are talking about votes/propositions being coupled on Monday... with negotiating a customs union the most supported outcome. The government could then couple a third (edit:fourth. I'm losing count) meaningful vote on the WA with a commitment to negotiate a firm customs union ... as opposed to the best of both worlds approach they seemingly want that leaves us in the 'backstop' if and when talks for a trade agreement break down. The EU are seemingly willing to do this.
Labour whipped their MPs to vote for Clarke's proposal.
To be honest, I can see the basis of a solution in there. Unfortunately I don't think Labour will go for it.
-
I can see an intermediary path. MPs are talking about votes/propositions being coupled on Monday... with negotiating a customs union the most supported outcome. The government could then couple a third (edit:fourth. I'm losing count) meaningful vote on the WA with a commitment to negotiate a firm customs union ... as opposed to the best of both worlds approach they seemingly want that leaves us in the 'backstop' if and when talks for a trade agreement break down. The EU are seemingly willing to do this.
Labour whipped their MPs to vote for Clarke's proposal.
If we get a Customs Union, there's no need for a backstop.
I'm actually wanting one of the indicative votes - any of them, I don't really care which - to get a majority because I'll enjoy the sight of May - when giving that disgraceful statement blaming Parliament for her disaster - after complaining that Parliament should back something (by which she meant her deal) try and backslide out of it when Parliament does make a positive vote and it's not what she wants to help keep the Tory party together. :lol:
-
That's the point I was making, yes.
-
The devil will be in the detail between that customers union (i.e. the backstop) and a customs union. (and how its sold)
-
The devil will be in the detail between that customers union (i.e. the backstop) and a customs union. (and how its sold)
My understanding is that Clarke's proposal is to be in the EU Customs Union as is, not the nebulous 'a' Customs Union Labour are on about.
-
The devil will be in the detail between that customers union (i.e. the backstop) and a customs union. (and how its sold)
My understanding is that Clarke's proposal is to be in the EU Customs Union as is, not the nebulous 'a' Customs Union Labour are on about.
That's not how I understand it. If the wording on the BBC is correct it ''calls for the UK to negotiate a permanent customs union with the EU after Brexit".
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47715933
-
The devil will be in the detail between that customers union (i.e. the backstop) and a customs union. (and how its sold)
My understanding is that Clarke's proposal is to be in the EU Customs Union as is, not the nebulous 'a' Customs Union Labour are on about.
That's not how I understand it. If the wording on the BBC is correct it ''calls for the UK to negotiate a permanent customs union with the EU after Brexit".
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47715933
I hadn't noticed that, thanks.
-
I never quite understood what Corbyn was on about 18 months back, when, after a year of saying he wanted us out of THE Customs Union, he announced that he wanted us to be in A Customs Union.
I'm sure it's clear enough to him.
-
This issue about Vote Leave breaking the law.
We'd never have heard about it other than for a whistleblower from the Vote Leave staff.
He's a Muslim. Gay, but he, understandably, kept it secret from his family.
After he went public on the crime, another Vote Leave staff member, who is now an adviser in No 10 very publicly outed him. Causing the bloke all sorts of personal grief.
Nice folk, these Vote Leave criminals, aren't they?
-
I can see an intermediary path. MPs are talking about votes/propositions being coupled on Monday... with negotiating a customs union the most supported outcome. The government could then couple a third (edit:fourth. I'm losing count) meaningful vote on the WA with a commitment to negotiate a firm customs union ... as opposed to the best of both worlds approach they seemingly want that leaves us in the 'backstop' if and when talks for a trade agreement break down. The EU are seemingly willing to do this.
Labour whipped their MPs to vote for Clarke's proposal.
To be honest, I can see the basis of a solution in there. Unfortunately I don't think Labour will go for it.
Why is that they voted for all the CU alternatives on Wednesday? It was the Tories, Lib Dems, SDP & TIGGERS who refused to support them.
It wont get thro without Tory support & May has always said - and she repeated it today - that she would never support a CU or SM.
-
Speaking of nice folk, Tommy Robinson and pals are teararsing round London as we speak, harassing people, barging into offices of papers they don't like, verbally and physically attacking journalists, cameramen, random cyclists...
Remember that next time someone starts chelping about how the lefties in Antifa are the real problem. And remember how that million-strong march last week passed without any major incidents like this.
-
Any news about Farage's Million Man March lately?
-
Nope.
No news about his statement that a 52-48 result wouldn't be the end of the story either.
-
I can see an intermediary path. MPs are talking about votes/propositions being coupled on Monday... with negotiating a customs union the most supported outcome. The government could then couple a third (edit:fourth. I'm losing count) meaningful vote on the WA with a commitment to negotiate a firm customs union ... as opposed to the best of both worlds approach they seemingly want that leaves us in the 'backstop' if and when talks for a trade agreement break down. The EU are seemingly willing to do this.
Labour whipped their MPs to vote for Clarke's proposal.
To be honest, I can see the basis of a solution in there. Unfortunately I don't think Labour will go for it.
Why is that they voted for all the CU alternatives on Wednesday? It was the Tories, Lib Dems, SDP & TIGGERS who refused to support them.
It wont get thro without Tory support & May has always said - and she repeated it today - that she would never support a CU or SM.
We'll see if the SNP and the Tinge lot move next week, but if they remain hell-bent on a second referendum I don't think they will back a Customs Union proposal.
-
You know? I thought my contempt for the intellectually vacuous, but massively ambitious Dominic Raab couldn't go deeper than it already is.
Then this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/danbarker/status/1111550418545446912
You can picture it can't you? Interview in his office....now...what books can I stack behind me to give the impression that I'm a serious political thinker?
t**t.
-
Hidden the Best of Soccer AM compilation DVDs just out of frame, thankfully.
-
I had a run in with him on a Radio5 phone in a few years ago, when he was a thick-as-pigshit nobody, rather than the thick-as-pigshit potential PM he is today.
He was promoting his Private Members' Bill that proposed to make strikes illegal unless a majority of the Union MEMBERS, not just those who voted, voted to strike.
I phoned in and pointed out that he'd been elected with the votes of only 42% of all his registered constituents.
His response was that that was a totally different thing, and then he went on to something else.
Now I think about it, odd isn't it? The World According to Raab. Strikes are so important that they need a majority of all eligible voters to trigger them. But No Deal Brexit can be the policy to follow even though it is only supported by a minority of a minority of the electorate.
But I'm sure that's just a totally different thing.
-
Go figa - No Deal Brexit was the option that gained the largest number of Tory votes on Wednesday
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/winners-losers-and-ones-watch-brexit-indicative-votes
-
I love those tree diagrams that the media have been producing showing you what could happen next on a timeline of options. Here's an excellent one from a cabinet minister showing exactly what the government choices are after yesterdays vote
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1111779352973332480
-
So, her deal failed to pass in Parliament for a 3rd time, you'd think that would be the end of it right?
Oh no, not with our Theresa...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47756122
-
You know? I thought my contempt for the intellectually vacuous, but massively ambitious Dominic Raab couldn't go deeper than it already is.
Then this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/danbarker/status/1111550418545446912
You can picture it can't you? Interview in his office....now...what books can I stack behind me to give the impression that I'm a serious political thinker?
t**t.
Total recall, Arnold scharzeneggers autobiography is a cracking read.
He's a top bloke, and our country could do with a statesman like him.
As for politicians doing interviews with books in view, it's hardly new is it?! Life's too short to get worked up by that, and then vent on a small off topic forum for a small provincial football club.
I'm sure raab will be trembling at the thought of upsetting bst!
-
I don't think you've quite got the hang of how democracy works have you BS?
-
Tweet of the Week
https://mobile.twitter.com/empiresend/status/1111762744775270400
-
I don't think you've quite got the hang of how democracy works have you BS?
Oh that's coming from someone who refuses to accept the referendum result... Your a joke
-
I accept the result. That's a fact. What I don't accept is the legitimacy, given that one Leave campaign admitted criminal activity yesterday and the other one is still being investigated by the National Crime Agency for what is, effectively, treason.
Mind, that's got nowt to do with the point I was making earlier. Democracy relies on millions of people having millions of discussions, pondering over issues and coming to conclusions. In our own, tiny way, that's what's going on here. It's telling that you consider it laughable.
-
I accept the result. That's a fact. What I don't accept is the legitimacy, given that one Leave campaign admitted criminal activity yesterday and the other one is still being investigated by the National Crime Agency for what is, effectively, treason.
Mind, that's got nowt to do with the point I was making earlier. Democracy relies on millions of people having millions of discussions, pondering over issues and coming to conclusions. In our own, tiny way, that's what's going on here. It's telling that you consider it laughable.
Grow up, nobody, but nobody put a gun to anyone's head and told them how to vote.
The people voted on their opinions over decades of EU rule, the result was we are leaving. Get over your small idiological reasons, and accept the result, if the small minded politicians just like you accepted that we are leaving, this country would be in a far better place.
You sir, are a disgrace.
-
no boomstick, people voted on the "facts" given at the time by both sides, which turned out to be a lot of lies, mainly from the leave campaign. Add to that decades of propoganda in certain daily rags spewing lies about immigration and religion, and that's why more people voted leave.
It's telling to see you added one of their little fibs at the end of your post, "the country will be in a better place" - leading economists around the world, and even the PM herself pre-referendum, have stated Britain will be in a worse place after any kind of Brexit. The fact the MPs ignore these facts is a disgrace.
-
Good to see that in-between posting in here, BS manages to get round the country interviewing people and finding out why they voted the way they did.
It's almost as if those polling firms who do this for a living (and found, for example, that in the week of the vote, 52% of people said they believed the £350m figure on the bus, the one that was actually a lie repeated and repeated by Vote Leave) are wasting their time. They should just ask BS.
And the Vote Leave campaign that spent £6m (plus another £600k that they gave to BeLeave - an action that they admitted yesterday was criminal) pouring lies into the Facebook feeds of people they had identified as being susceptible to being triggered by those lies. What was THAT all about? Stupid bloody waste of money! BS could have told them that folk had already decided.
-
the ' Frauderendum ' will get all the respect it fully deserves. No Chance of Leaving after the coming 'People's Vote ' . What we need to do then is to join the Euro and put the Brexit farce behind us.
-
I accept the result. That's a fact. What I don't accept is the legitimacy, given that one Leave campaign admitted criminal activity yesterday and the other one is still being investigated by the National Crime Agency for what is, effectively, treason.
Mind, that's got nowt to do with the point I was making earlier. Democracy relies on millions of people having millions of discussions, pondering over issues and coming to conclusions. In our own, tiny way, that's what's going on here. It's telling that you consider it laughable.
Grow up, nobody, but nobody put a gun to anyone's head and told them how to vote.
The people voted on their opinions over decades of EU rule, the result was we are leaving. Get over your small idiological reasons, and accept the result, if the small minded politicians just like you accepted that we are leaving, this country would be in a far better place.
You sir, are a disgrace.
That's odd. Axholme Lion said - in this very thread - that he voted for entirely different reasons than you're saying. I get the distinct impression that your claim to be able to read other people's minds is to be taken with a Siberian saltmine.
-
I accept the result. That's a fact. What I don't accept is the legitimacy, given that one Leave campaign admitted criminal activity yesterday and the other one is still being investigated by the National Crime Agency for what is, effectively, treason.
Mind, that's got nowt to do with the point I was making earlier. Democracy relies on millions of people having millions of discussions, pondering over issues and coming to conclusions. In our own, tiny way, that's what's going on here. It's telling that you consider it laughable.
Grow up, nobody, but nobody put a gun to anyone's head and told them how to vote.
The people voted on their opinions over decades of EU rule, the result was we are leaving. Get over your small idiological reasons, and accept the result, if the small minded politicians just like you accepted that we are leaving, this country would be in a far better place.
You sir, are a disgrace.
Maybe you should ask your government why they didn't clean this mess up a couple of years ago and make a clean break asap after the vote BS, there's no point in throwing the toys out of the pram now and blaming everyone else, your gov't decided to have a vote and under what conditions and you and them have been fighting amongst yourselves since. There's no one more to blame for us being at this point and suffering what we are now more than those that could not accept the very first vote and gave oxygen to farage and his ilk and it's your party and those that vote for them. What a treacherous bunch of hyenas May and the ERG are, can't win using the rules or not - bend the rules, it's abuse of process, maladministration.
-
Jonathan Pie sums up the position for those who have not been keeping up;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IL2XwSkFJQ
TV news will never be the same again!
-
Boris Johnson and Michael Gove under fire on Vote Leave’s law-breaking
Anna Soubry:
''Johnson and Gove should be providing a full and proper explanation to the British people following the dropping of this appeal.” She added she expected to one day see a “public inquiry into what happened and how we got into this terrible mess”
''Gove and Johnson played key roles in Vote Leave, Gove as co-convener and Johnson as a figurehead for the official Brexit campaign. A series of other senior government or Tory figures also sat on its committee, including Liam Fox, Iain Duncan Smith, former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab and the former international development secretary Priti Patel''
''Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran said the confirmation that Vote Leave had broken the law underlined the need for a second referendum''
“It is now incumbent on the government to act. We have heard minister after minister say the referendum is valid. This is proof it was not,” she said. “Going ahead with Brexit in these circumstances would be the biggest betrayal of our democracy of all.”
And it's all well documented, I would hope there are no apologists for this law breaking rabble here?.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/30/gove-johnson-under-fire-vote-leave-fine-appeal-dropped
5,997,345 signatures
-
6,000,007 signatures
-
How ironic...
https://mobile.twitter.com/CER_EU/status/1111915972632420353
-
How ironic...
https://mobile.twitter.com/CER_EU/status/1111915972632420353
you couldn't chuffin write this script...
-
Liz Truss on R4 today: Clarke's customs union plan lost by more than May's deal, so we shouldn't be able to bring that back. Except Clarke's plan lost by 8 votes, whereas May's deal lost by 58. This went completely unchallenged.
-
Darren McCaffrey @DarrenEuronews
🇩🇪German’s Deputy Foreign Minister:
🥊“Brexit is a big shitshow, I say that now very undiplomatically”
🥊“90%” cabinet “no idea how workers think, live, work and behave”
🥊Politicians “born with silver spoons in their mouths, who went to private schools” that will not suffer.
Very true, very accurate.
6,032,157 signatures
-
Liz Truss on R4 today: Clarke's customs union plan lost by more than May's deal, so we shouldn't be able to bring that back. Except Clarke's plan lost by 8 votes, whereas May's deal lost by 58. This went completely unchallenged.
And forgetting the two previous defeats which should have stopped it coming back at a second time, let alone a third.
-
Just seen we now have The One Nation group. The opposite to the ERG, Tories who aren't 100% cretins. They'll be meeting tonight to discuss the indicative votes.
-
Not been keeping up with this thread so apologies if this is repetition..
Many people argue that leave means leave and we voted out so if we don’t honour the referendum result that would be undemocratic.
How is it democratic for 630 odd individuals to have 3 possibly 4 votes on the same subject, when 40 million of us had only one chance.?
Calling for a second referendum close in time to the firsts may seem a bit sour grapes, but we are nearly 3 years downstream and the whole brexit issue is still a complete clusterf**k.!
-
good point by macho there.
The Brexit Broadcasting Corporation never challenge any pro Brexit comment , be it an obvious lie or just completely ridiculous.
After every key event they flock to Brexit mps for comment or some random Brexiteer wanting to ' take their country back ' .
BBC question time - check out the proportion of leave MEPs and pro Europe MEPs who have appeared
100% LEAVE!!!!
The BBC is not the impartial source it used to be and is run by right wing Tory sympathisers.
Channel 4 News and Sky now more reliable
-
Liz Truss on R4 this morning: I don't fear No Deal
Interviewer: But what would that mean for the Irish border.
Liz Truss: Errr...err...there are solutions that could be explored.
f**k me. I mean...F**K ME!
These are the people who are supposed to be running the f**king country.
What has been THE central issue in Brexit negotiations for the past year? The fact that there IS no magic fairy dust solution to the Irish border problem, if we leave the CU.
Full stop. End.
But again, this is not about Brexit. This is about another politician positioning herself for a pot at No10, and pandering to the Victorian flat-earthers in the Tory party membership.
-
Strange bedfellows indeed. This morning I heard a pro-Remain Tory and a member of the ERG both call for a lengthy extension of Article 50.
OK, they want it for different reasons, but still it shows what a state we're in.
-
I don't see why the EU are making the border in Ireland our problem. If Northern Ireland wasn't attached to the republic there wouldn't have been a problem so why have they made it into one?
-
Rep. Ireland is an EU country, it literally is their problem. And ours.
-
I don't see why the EU are making the border in Ireland our problem. If Northern Ireland wasn't attached to the republic there wouldn't have been a problem so why have they made it into one?
It's our problem because we signed the GFA. The EU didn't. But they're going to look out for the ROI, who did.
And if there's No Deal, there has to be a hard border for us to comply with WTO terms. You know, that wonderful WTO that's the solution to all our problems?
-
This is unreal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47769495
For those who aren't political nerds, the Chief Whip, in normal times is THE most loyal Cabinet member. It's his job to see that whatever Cabinet determines as policy gets implemented in the House. The Chief Whip never, and I mean NEVER criticises Cabinet.
This is the scale of the crisis this Govt has run into. In a nutshell, our Govt has stopped functioning.
-
I don't see why the EU are making the border in Ireland our problem. If Northern Ireland wasn't attached to the republic there wouldn't have been a problem so why have they made it into one?
Because of the Good Friday Agreement? We either break the Good Friday Agreement and have a border (which could possibly lead to more of those bomb weve seen recently), have a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland but keep NI as part of the UK or we give NI to ROI, which the Northern Irish don't want. It's a no win situation and it's not for the EU to work out a solution.
-
I heard/saw something the other day, might have been on here. A member of the cabinet said that the cabinet gets together, half say we should go for idea A, the other half say we should go for idea B and Theresa May picks idea C. This is why we're heading towards something nobody wants.
-
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/why-common-market-2-0-is-the-brexit-we-need/
An explanation of "Common Market 2.0." I have heard quite a few MPs this afternoon saying that this option would involve being in a Customs Union with the EU. This is incorrect, although as the author points out we could derogate from the EEA/ EFTA rules to remain in a temporary CU with the EU until "alternative arrangements" are in place- basically the Irish Backstop.
Apologies if it's TL:DR but that's the text if you can't get past the paywall.
In recent weeks, there has been a lot of inaccurate media coverage of Common Market 2.0, which proposes that the UK should remain a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) after Brexit. The fundamental purpose of the EEA Agreement is to extend the benefits of the single market to countries that are outside the European Union but members of the European Free Trade Association (Efta). EEA membership for non-EU states involves accepting the rules of the single market – including the four freedoms – but excludes other EU policies that many in the UK dislike, such as economic and monetary union, political union, the common agricultural policy, the common fisheries policy, and other common policies.
The advantages of retaining deep levels of access by UK suppliers to the single market in goods and services are widely accepted. But truly “frictionless” access can be achieved only if the EU is confident that single market rules are correctly applied and if there is a process for updating our rules as the EU’s rules develop. This is what the EEA Agreement achieves. The Agreement was designed with the expectation that Sweden, Austria, Finland and Switzerland would also take part, so it was explicitly designed to cope with a large number of states. It sets out a workable answer to questions routinely ducked by those proposing a “common rule book” or “strong single market alignment”: how would UK compliance be monitored and enforced? And what will happen if the EU law to which the UK has “aligned” then develops?
The EEA Agreement is different from the framework of EU law which applies to the UK as a member of the EU. EEA law does not have “direct effect”: it has effect only because national parliaments have incorporated its rules into their own law. While the EEA/Efta States do not have votes on new EU laws, they have a right to be consulted and, crucially, every EEA/EFTA State has to agree before new EU single market law is carried over into the EEA Agreement. If they do not agree, there is a process in which the two sides try to reach agreement on what should be carried over, failing which the relevant part of the EEA Agreement is suspended.
Of course, it would not be sensible for the UK to go into an EEA/EFTA arrangement intending to refuse to carry over new EU law routinely. But the suggestion that EEA/EFTA states are pure ‘rule-takers’ is simply wrong: the right to be consulted has real teeth, since, if their legitimate concerns are ignored, they can ultimately refuse to carry over the unacceptable provision.
If the UK became an EEA/EFTA State, it would have the right to appoint a judge onto the EFTA Court (which resolves disputes over interpretation of EEA law) as well as a UK member of, and officials at, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (which enforces compliance by the EEA/EFTA States with their obligations, and applied competition and State aid rules). The importance of those bodies vis-à-vis the European Court of Justice and the Commission would increase, as they would have more cases to deal with. So the UK would retain at least some of its considerable influence over the day-to-day development of single market law.
Some have questioned whether UK membership of EEA/EFTA is negotiable. That is a political question, of course. But the UK Government itself accepted in a 2017 case before the High Court that, in the absence of an agreement with all the other EEA Member States or a formal notice to leave the EEA (and this has never been served), the UK would remain “listed as” a party to the EEA Agreement after it left the EU. So the Government accepted in court that the legal default is that the UK remains a member of the EEA after Brexit, although the Government believes the UK’s membership would not be operational.
Some have raised questions about the compatibility of membership of EFTA with the comprehensive customs arrangement that we will need to enter to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland or in the Irish Sea – at least until alternative arrangements that guarantee frictionless trade have been agreed with the EU. It is true that the four existing EFTA States will need to agree that the UK could derogate, at least for a while, from a few provisions of the EFTA Convention (in particular, the requirement to try to accede to existing EFTA/third country free trade agreements). But there is no reason why that could not be agreed: derogations are frequently found in accession agreements, and it is hard to see why a derogation of that kind would be a deal-breaker.
Ultimately, the decision to accept or reject Common Market 2.0 is a political question. But, when so much hangs on the outcome of tonight’s vote, the decision to support or oppose the Common Market 2.0 motion should be taken on the basis of an accurate understanding of what it involves.
George Peretz QC is part of the Future Relationship Working Group set up by Common Market 2.0 to revise the Political Declaration
-
Peston expecting CM2.0 to get over 300 votes tonight now Labour are whipping for it. So if not a majority then very close to it.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1112723381135265792
What he doesn't say is that after Julian Smith's comments its irrevelant what the Tories whip for as they can now do as they like - we can just take that as a given. Be interesting to see if enough do vote for it to give it a majority.
-
The SNP have also said they'll vote for it. It will probably get a majority because there are some Tories who back it.
It will be interesting to see how TIG and the DUP vote on this one and Ken Clarke's CU motion.
-
It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.
Questionable if it is the best outcome. On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't? Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1112746689960513539
God up above.
-
It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.
Questionable if it is the best outcome. On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't? Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....
The biggest thing is no need for a backstop. That's what's made a lot of MPs vote against May's deal.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1112691941400039429
Remember this folks, the next time you get your collar felt.
"Oh sorry officer. I didn't realise I was committing a crime. Someone told me it was OK."
Should work fine. The Tory MPs who ran Vote Leave seem to have got away with it.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1112746689960513539
God up above.
That has to be an April fool
-
The way MPs are talking several of the propositions will pass tonight.
-
That's what I thought Filo.
If it is, it's conned Evan Davies and Naheem Zahawi (who seems to be May's human shield at the moment) cos they were discussing it on R4 PM programme earlier.
-
Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.
If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...
Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.
-
The way MPs are talking several of the propositions will pass tonight.
I'm not sure if that's necessarily a good thing. Better that one option gets a majority than two or three.
-
Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.
If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...
Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.
It's come up on the rails a bit because it wasn't the most popular or second most popular last week.
I think it's probably the best option available, but the cynic in me makes me wonder if Remainers see it as a vehicle by which we might eventually rejoin the EU in full. Previously they have backed a Second Referendum, but as we know, such things can be unpredictable.
-
Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.
If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...
Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.
But will it end the madness BST? Nige, JRM and the usual Media suspects will just see it as another way to whip up more anti EU mania.
-
Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.
Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.
-
I struggle to come to grips with the concept of agreeing the “least worst” outcome..
It’s like being right in the shit, but arguing how deep in the shit we are happy to go..
-
Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.
Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.
I think we can agree that the Conservative Party in its current form is finished, whatever the outcome of the Brexit process.
David Cameron really did well, didn't he?
-
The SNP have also said they'll vote for it. It will probably get a majority because there are some Tories who back it.
It will be interesting to see how TIG and the DUP vote on this one and Ken Clarke's CU motion.
The DUP are abstaining on everything. At least one Lib Dem has abstained on the CU and CM2.0 motions and voted for the other two.
-
It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.
Questionable if it is the best outcome. On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't? Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....
The biggest thing is no need for a backstop. That's what's made a lot of MPs vote against May's deal.
Some suggestion actually that it does still need a WA.
The interesting thing will be what the government does after tonight's votes....
-
Here's a guess BFYP.
700 of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.
-
Here's a guess BFYP.
700 of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.
I demand a recount!!
-
No Glyn. It REALLY WOULD be the 4th time.
-
Here's a guess BFYP.
700 of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.
*ahem*
PS If anything gets a positive vote tonight I can't see there being any chance whatsoever that Bercow would allow May to put her deal before the Commons again.
-
Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.
Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.
. The AfD leader asks "Is it any wonder the British see bad faith behind every manoeuvre from Brussels?" https://youtu.be/63IcW4eo4uM what’s Mogg said that’s bad?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1112802058296492032
Interesting recent polling figures. The Tories have dropped to mid-30s with Labour over the past couple of weeks. Hard to see Cabinet going for a snap Election in these circumstances.
-
Yes Bpool. And Rees-Mogg replied approvingly. So he's agreeing with a neo-Nazi party.
-
<Ian Fox states that being in a CU with the EU would be trying to negotiate with one arm tied behind your back.
Maybe better than being gaffer taped head to foot as we are now then?
On a good note I read yesterday the Germany wanted to offer free movement for UK citizens regardless of ConBrexit outcomes.
-
If there's a positive vote and wonder of wonders May takes it on board and says 'I'll pursue this', is there any way for Parliament to say 'Oh no you won't, we don't trust you not to make a shambles of this as well'? Apart from a Vote Of Confidence, that is.
-
Here's a guess BFYP.
700 of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.
Quite. Not sure on your maths mind ;)
The result of tonight's vote will be interesting and something will probably win.
Interesting also labour sources saying despite backing some things it may not become their policy - bizarre.
-
That'll be the Fox who has negotiated 7 of his target 40 deals in the past 2.5 years will it?
The one who's failed to get deals with Japan and Canada, but did get deals with Palestine and the Faroe Islands?
-
And again all no. One day they'll want something.
-
And round and round we go, reject everything again, just shoot the f**king lot of them!
-
All four lost, although Ken Clarke's Customs Union only lost by three votes.
-
Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, says no solution has won a majority.
Which dick put up ''No Solution" as an option?
-
While it’s close I think if it came to it a lot of the ones who abstained would not vote for it so the margin will be bigger
-
Nick Boles has crossed the floor. Dramatic stuff.
-
All four lost, although Ken Clarke's Customs Union only lost by three votes.
Bear in mind the abstentions though.
-
Yes Bpool. And Rees-Mogg replied approvingly. So he's agreeing with a neo-Nazi party.
he was agreeing with a certain part of what they said, there are some awful people in the world but it does nit mean you have to disagree with everything they say
-
Right wing of the conservative party just dont want to compromise.
-
Really as the speaker won’t the them vote in mays deal again none of these should be voted on in the same format as it’s at least twice now they have lost
-
Right wing of the conservative party just dont want to compromise.
left wing labour don’t either
-
Right wing of the conservative party just dont want to compromise.
left wing labour don’t either
What are you talking about?
-
The left wing of the labour party are on the front bench and whipped for three of the options today!!!
-
Really as the speaker won’t the them vote in mays deal again none of these should be voted on in the same format as it’s at least twice now they have lost
It is of course the option on the table with most votes so far...
There appears to be no agreeable solution within this parliament.
-
Right wing of the conservative party just dont want to compromise.
To be honest, the problem has been that despite the mechanism of leaving always having to be some form of compromise, when the Leavers 'won' the referendum, it seemed to make them think they should get everything they thought they were voting for without having to actually negotiate. Because they 'won'.
-
Really as the speaker won’t the them vote in mays deal again none of these should be voted on in the same format as it’s at least twice now they have lost
It is of course the option on the table with most votes so far...
There appears to be no agreeable solution within this parliament.
Looks like the individual government MPs have abstained again. Anyone would think they don't want Parliament to get a positive result, despite what May says.
-
Unfortunately not the hard right just want no deal and labour a general election it will amaze me if any of them back down
-
Unfortunately not the hard right just want no deal and labour a general election it will amaze me if any of them back down
Labour has backed down and changed its position several times.
-
The dup will never vote for any of them either and if it came to it would vote against which is another 10 votes
-
Unfortunately not the hard right just want no deal and labour a general election it will amaze me if any of them back down
Labour has backed down and changed its position several times.
labour are doing what it takes to get a general election nothing more
-
Really as the speaker won’t the them vote in mays deal again none of these should be voted on in the same format as it’s at least twice now they have lost
It is of course the option on the table with most votes so far...
There appears to be no agreeable solution within this parliament.
Looks like the individual government MPs have abstained again. Anyone would think they don't want Parliament to get a positive result, despite what May says.
Assumption is that they would all vote one way so it's not needed. If a proposal is taken forward it would need further vote anyway.
-
Really as the speaker won’t the them vote in mays deal again none of these should be voted on in the same format as it’s at least twice now they have lost
It is of course the option on the table with most votes so far...
There appears to be no agreeable solution within this parliament.
Looks like the individual government MPs have abstained again. Anyone would think they don't want Parliament to get a positive result, despite what May says.
Assumption is that they would all vote one way so it's not needed. If a proposal is taken forward it would need further vote anyway.
If the Tories don't use the whip, you can't make that assumption at all. It's well known that there's quite a wide spectrum of opinions, even in the Cabinet itself.
-
As it's blindingly obvious that agreement cannot be found by the politicians then a second vote with options should be had or we stay.
6,044,432 signatures
-
As it's blindingly obvious that agreement cannot be found by the politicians then a second vote with options should be had or we stay.
6,044,432 signatures
That's the obvious but nope we're heading for Mays MV4 failure then no deal as the default.
-
Syd that is 11 million short
-
As it's blindingly obvious that agreement cannot be found by the politicians then a second vote with options should be had or we stay.
6,044,432 signatures
That's the obvious but nope we're heading for Mays MV4 failure then no deal as the default.
The ERG, or at least its representatives who have spoken, are cock-a-hoop tonight. In some ways I can't blame them. They have held firm and other MPs have failed to coalesce around an option.
-
General election incoming?
-
As it's blindingly obvious that agreement cannot be found by the politicians then a second vote with options should be had or we stay.
6,044,432 signatures
6 million signatures or 17 million in a real vote Sydney?
-
Do you think it would do any good donny? We could well be in exactly the same position as now
-
Do you think it would do any good donny? We could well be in exactly the same position as now
Then what do we do? Just leave with no deal. Anyone who wants no deal either doesn't understand what the impacts are or is selfish, xenophobic and rich so it won't affect them.
-
General election incoming?
That's one option and the Cabinet will discuss it tomorrow. But that will need an extension and I'm not sure the EU will grant it.
I'm not a betting man, but I think "No Deal By Default" is now favourite. Unless MPs swallow hard and say they will accept May's Deal as a less worse alternative. Personally I can't see that.
PS. Having seen Anna Soubry on TV it seems that the TIG/ Tinge lot didn't vote for either the CU or CM 2.0. Talk about Hard Remain. Then she had the gall to express sympathy for Boles, who seems an honourable man. Hypocrite.
-
No Deal or General Election.
Nothing else stands a chance now.
-
General election incoming?
That's one option and the Cabinet will discuss it tomorrow. But that will need an extension and I'm not sure the EU will grant it.
I'm not a betting man, but I think "No Deal By Default" is now favourite. Unless MPs swallow hard and say they will accept May's Deal as a less worse alternative. Personally I can't see that.
PS. Having seen Anna Soubry on TV it seems that the TIG/ Tinge lot didn't vote for either the CU or CM 2.0. Talk about Hard Remain. Then she had the gall to express sympathy for Boles, who seems an honourable man. Hypocrite.
Yeah, quite daft of TIG. They're so pro-Peoples Vote they'd rather not vote for CU and we end up with no deal.
-
General election incoming?
That's one option and the Cabinet will discuss it tomorrow. But that will need an extension and I'm not sure the EU will grant it.
I'm not a betting man, but I think "No Deal By Default" is now favourite. Unless MPs swallow hard and say they will accept May's Deal as a less worse alternative. Personally I can't see that.
PS. Having seen Anna Soubry on TV it seems that the TIG/ Tinge lot didn't vote for either the CU or CM 2.0. Talk about Hard Remain. Then she had the gall to express sympathy for Boles, who seems an honourable man. Hypocrite.
Yeah, quite daft of TIG. They're so pro-Peoples Vote they'd rather not vote for CU and we end up with no deal.
You are quite right there.
PS. Boles won't be sitting with them. He goes up even further in my estimation. A bunch of shallow opportunists.
-
How close are we to Civil unrest?
Everyone is sick to the back teeth of this
-
How close are we to Civil unrest?
Everyone is sick to the back teeth of this
Don't forget this is not France, this is the UK.
As Mark E. Smith put it "start the revolution when the pubs shut."
Being serious, it won't happen unless we either leave with no deal or Article 50 is revoked. More likely we'll go through another 1-2 years of the nonsense.
-
I can kinda agree with this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1112844097033732098?p=v
-
Syd that is 11 million short
Thanks Selby for providing another opportunity to show that 6,045,385 signatures is 6,045,385 signatures more than the Conbrexit team have, and not only but also according to the rules where the last vote taken counts which I assume you are a signaTORY to then this is the last vote.
There is a rumor of an idea where people will be allowed a vote that will split the country, make us 180 billion poorer within 3 years and cause absolute chaos and where a huge slice of the finance sector and the last of the manufacturing industry goes to the Europe. But I said NO, no one would be that stupid, would they?
-
Leave with a properly negotiated deal would be my preferred option, but no deal is what we probably deserve.
And the sun will shine the day after, you will all still have to go to work, and a few days after everyone will be thinking what was all the fuss about.
The only certain thing will be that the market makers in the city of London will have made a killing, and will be looking at the EU and if there is any weakness in its make up, probably the Mediterranean countries they will go after their scalps like a pack of Hyenas, and sod anyone else, there's money to be made.
-
Just a staging post tonight.
The real action starts with the Cabinet resignations.
Likely this week, unavoidable next IMHO.
Might start after May has her 6 hour session tomorrow......6 hours with her would break most!
If May knows that division in the Cabinet is imminent, how does she plan for the breakdown in predictable outcomes that will follow on?
I reckon she will try to put her deal again, fail again, and then call a GE to break the impasse and hope the party will re-group around a new leader.
Assumes BoJo can be kept off the showdown list, clearly!
-
I can kinda agree with this.
https://mobile.twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1112844097033732098?p=v
It's tempting to blame both sides TRB but the only reason people want a second vote option is because everyone knows the first vote result was corrupt and all options except staying will inevitably put UK citizens in a worse position in every way. It's only the die-hards that are still screaming leave means leave, and they can't tell us what leave means.
-
The SNP’s priority is to stop the Brexit chaos and the catastrophic consequences it will have on Scotland and the UK’s economy, jobs and living standards.
The public vote motion received the biggest number of votes in favour in Parliament and it is now clear that the only way to break the Brexit impasse is by bringing this back to the people – with remain on the ballot paper.
It is also welcome to see growing support across the parties for the SNP’s motion to revoke article 50 to avoid a no-deal Brexit outcome. However, the decision of the Labour leadership not to support the motion is unforgivable and a damning indictment of the party.
Given everything we now know, the best way forward to break the Brexit impasse is to put the decision back to the people in a second EU referendum – and both a referendum and revoking Article 50 must be part of the next steps in this process.
People in Scotland have been ignored throughout the Brexit process. Any pretence that Scotland is treated as an equal partner in the UK has gone out the window. Whatever happens now it is clear that the only way to properly protect Scotland’s interests is with independence.
If this means Corbyn will have go then so be it.
-
Leave with a properly negotiated deal would be my preferred option, but no deal is what we probably deserve.
And the sun will shine the day after, you will all still have to go to work, and a few days after everyone will be thinking what was all the fuss about.
The only certain thing will be that the market makers in the city of London will have made a killing, and will be looking at the EU and if there is any weakness in its make up, probably the Mediterranean countries they will go after their scalps like a pack of Hyenas, and sod anyone else, there's money to be made.
It would be good for the debate to expand on this Selby and tell us why your view of a rosy future should be believed over a clear majority of heads of industry and financial experts who are telling us the exact opposite.
-
Interesting observation from Vince cable.
TIG and several LDs voted against CU and CM2.0. Because they want Ref2.
So, had there been an option for either of those PLUS Ref2, TIG and LD would have flipped and those votes would have gone the other way.
Is that the way out?
EDIT. Scrap that. Head not screwed on. If they tagged a Ref onto the CU or CM2.0 options, a dozen or two Tory MPs would vote against it.
-
So. To summarise.
May's deal is a non-starter.
Parliament can't agree on any alternative.
No Deal is the default, but is supported only by about 1/3rd of MPs and 1/3rd of the public and was never seriously discussed in 2016.
So there's nothing that has a democratic mandate in the House or in the Country.
Reight f**king mess young Dave tipped us into before f**king off, eh?
-
So. To summarise.
May's deal is a non-starter.
Parliament can't agree on any alternative.
No Deal is the default, but is supported only by about 1/3rd of MPs and 1/3rd of the public and was never seriously discussed in 2016.
So there's nothing that has a democratic mandate in the House or in the Country.
Reight f**king mess young Dave tipped us into before f**king off, eh?
I've been reticent to put this into the mixing pot but losing 180 billion in less than three years (established fact) if this is extended out and the UK does become a financial basket case in the short term but just plain poorer in the long term it will of course hit all sectors including football.
Where will that put the lower leagues that are struggling for money now? PL teams will want more European comps to keep the money coming in but I can see a time where L1 and L2 become irrelevant to mainstream UK football and fall back into regional comps.
6,046,003 signatures
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/MShepheard/status/1112833986680840193/photo/1
Every single vote tonight would have gone through (or at least tied) if not for Labour MPs who abstained.
Shame on them.
And 10 times that shame on the ones who voted against CM2.0 and Ref2. They are tipping us perilously close to a No Deal outcome that will devastate their constituencies.
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this but does no deal make the ‘divorce settlement’ null and void?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/MShepheard/status/1112833986680840193/photo/1
Every single vote tonight would have gone through (or at least tied) if not for Labour MPs who abstained.
Shame on them.
And 10 times that shame on the ones who voted against CM2.0 and Ref2. They are tipping us perilously close to a No Deal outcome that will devastate their constituencies.
Would we not just say the same of the Tories that voted against may?
The obvious solution is perhaps a general election but the big issue is what happens if the same mps are returned? Or what would the party policies be and would people vote purely on Brexit?
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this but does no deal make the ‘divorce settlement’ null and void?
I don't think so, but we could do an Iceland and just not pay it, though things and the economic front will be so bad we'll hardly notice a mere 39 billion.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/MShepheard/status/1112833986680840193/photo/1
Every single vote tonight would have gone through (or at least tied) if not for Labour MPs who abstained.
Shame on them.
And 10 times that shame on the ones who voted against CM2.0 and Ref2. They are tipping us perilously close to a No Deal outcome that will devastate their constituencies.
Would we not just say the same of the Tories that voted against may?
The obvious solution is perhaps a general election but the big issue is what happens if the same mps are returned? Or what would the party policies be and would people vote purely on Brexit?
If a GE fails to resolve the issues then I'm thinking the future of UK politics lies in lots of smaller parties and a coalition will run the country, the larger parties are spread to wide to cover all the bases and cannot possibly be everything to everyone.
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this but does no deal make the ‘divorce settlement’ null and void?
We wouldn't have to pay it but if we want a future relationship with the biggest trading block in the world then not paying it's a bad idea.
-
Interesting observation from Vince cable.
TIG and several LDs voted against CU and CM2.0. Because they want Ref2.
So, had there been an option for either of those PLUS Ref2, TIG and LD would have flipped and those votes would have gone the other way.
Is that the way out?
EDIT. Scrap that. Head not screwed on. If they tagged a Ref onto the CU or CM2.0 options, a dozen or two Tory MPs would vote against it.
To me, this is where they are getting it wrong. Voting for a CU doesn't rule out a Second Referendum. You should only vote against something you really don't want, eg No Deal.
-
John Mann voted no to all 4.
Flint voted in favour of CU.
-
John Mann is a w**ker.
-
And people wonder why we are where we are....
https://youtu.be/SmqKvuyNPA8
-
Interesting observation from Vince cable.
TIG and several LDs voted against CU and CM2.0. Because they want Ref2.
So, had there been an option for either of those PLUS Ref2, TIG and LD would have flipped and those votes would have gone the other way.
Is that the way out?
EDIT. Scrap that. Head not screwed on. If they tagged a Ref onto the CU or CM2.0 options, a dozen or two Tory MPs would vote against it.
To me, this is where they are getting it wrong. Voting for a CU doesn't rule out a Second Referendum. You should only vote against something you really don't want, eg No Deal.
Voting for Theresa May's deal rules nothing out in future either. But it is May's deal so they wont vote for it.....
Let's be honest it May's deal goes through we likely do end up in a paralysis until a new election convenes. If anything that takes no deal off the table and not a lot more.
-
And people wonder why we are where we are....
https://youtu.be/SmqKvuyNPA8
That is f**king awful, I suggest the the BrexitCon brigade don't view it unsupervised.
-
Just a staging post tonight.
The real action starts with the Cabinet resignations.
Likely this week, unavoidable next IMHO.
Might start after May has her 6 hour session tomorrow......6 hours with her would break most!
If May knows that division in the Cabinet is imminent, how does she plan for the breakdown in predictable outcomes that will follow on?
I reckon she will try to put her deal again, fail again, and then call a GE to break the impasse and hope the party will re-group around a new leader.
Assumes BoJo can be kept off the showdown list, clearly!
If/ when there are resignations we'll know which direction May has decided to go in.
-
Just a staging post tonight.
The real action starts with the Cabinet resignations.
Likely this week, unavoidable next IMHO.
Might start after May has her 6 hour session tomorrow......6 hours with her would break most!
If May knows that division in the Cabinet is imminent, how does she plan for the breakdown in predictable outcomes that will follow on?
I reckon she will try to put her deal again, fail again, and then call a GE to break the impasse and hope the party will re-group around a new leader.
Assumes BoJo can be kept off the showdown list, clearly!
If/ when there are resignations we'll know which direction May has decided to go in.
I would suggest that events have overtaken La Miserables, almost to the point where their decisions are near irrelevant.
Brexit: Barnier says extending article 50 again to help UK would pose 'significant risks' to EU - live news
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/apr/02/brexit-latest-news-live-cabinet-theresa-may-barnier-says-extending-article-50-again-to-help-uk-would-pose-significant-risks-to-eu-live-news#comment-127609263
-
Leave with a properly negotiated deal would be my preferred option, but no deal is what we probably deserve.
And the sun will shine the day after, you will all still have to go to work, and a few days after everyone will be thinking what was all the fuss about.
The only certain thing will be that the market makers in the city of London will have made a killing, and will be looking at the EU and if there is any weakness in its make up, probably the Mediterranean countries they will go after their scalps like a pack of Hyenas, and sod anyone else, there's money to be made.
Wonder what the fuss was all about, with no deal.?
Try asking that of families with EU citizens in the UK and vice versa?
At least with a deal agreed and obviously with remain, their futures would be clear..
-
I can't understand the thinking of people like Owen Smith and other Labour MP's, who are in favour of Ref2 but think that means they can't vote for anything else as well.
4 options on the table, you surely support all that will help prevent the worst case scenario.
It is almost as though they think supporting Common Market 2.0 makes it impossible to support Ref2 at this stage.
I cannot see how voting for the Boles option would impact the prospects of Ref2 in any significant way.
By all means vote to a principle, but don't make your idea of the best prevent the good.
-
No harm in having common market, Mays Deal etc on a referendum. They don't want a second ref, they want A50 revoked.
-
It's still brinkmanship. We're not (quite) at the very edge of the cliff yet. Everyone is thinking that everyone else might bottle it first and come to their camp.
-
It's still brinkmanship. We're not (quite) at the very edge of the cliff yet. Everyone is thinking that everyone else might bottle it first and come to their camp.
The first cliff-edge was last Friday but that didn't do much to focus their minds did it?
We've just been given a bit more cliff but I don't see anybody using that extra time very productively.
Irresponsible, self-centred b******s.
-
Yes it did focus several minds.
Three of the 4 indicative votes last night came very close to passing. It's a process. If they go for one more round, I suspect one or more will get a majority.
What I AM shocked and saddened by is the number of Northern Labour MPs who are dead set against any of these compromises. If there IS an accidental No Deal, it will be their constituents who will take the biggest hammering. Every economic analysis says that. And it will be those MPs who brought it on.
-
Ed Miliband has said that we must avoid a no deal, yet he abstained on one of the votes last night
-
Listening to callers to the Jeremy Vine show on radio 2 it's clear that this should never have been put to the people in the first place. Most of them are leavers and come across as total f**kwits. The 'Leave means Leave' mantra is set in stone with so many of them, yet when asked they can't say what kind of leave they want! What the hell happened to education in this country that so many people are unable to reason things out without simply repeating meaningless sound-bites?
-
Pancho
Before rushing to stick the boot into MPs for not sorting out this problem immediately, reflect on what Yvette Cooper said earlier today.
"We have been attempting to squeeze into just a couple of days a process that really should have been happening for the last two years - a process of trying to build a consensus around the best way forward."
And that's the issue. MPs have been sidelined for 2 years while May tried to ram through her version of Brexit. But she can't get it through because it satisfies nobody and she has no control over her party. And, critically, May has made zero attempt to reach out to other parties to find a majority consensus view.
MPs are now having to do that for her in zero time, because she has pissed away the past 2.5 years.
-
Here you go. Some more numbers for Leave supporters to ignore.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1RD1T8
Since 2016, we've gone into a significantly slower growth path compared to what we were doing before and what other, comparable countries have done since.
Goldman Sachs reckon that's cost us the thick end of £100bn over the past three years.
The amount that we have lost and are continuing to lose would be enough to pay for 1million new nurses. One f**king MILLION new nurses.
Still. We took back control eh? I'm sure you're all chuffed to bits with yourselves.
EDIT. And THAT has come about while we're still in the EU. And the people who told you that wouldn't happen are the same snake oil salesmen telling you that it'll be fine if we have no deal. It won't matter that we consciously choose to make it harder to trade with half a billion if the wealthiest people on the planet, right on our doorstep. Because Liam Fox has negotiated Free Trade deals with Palestine and the Faroe Islands.
Honest question to those still supporting leave. What level of economic loss would convince you to think that you might have been sold a pup? How much of a hit in your own pocket would you say is too much?
£100?
£1000?
£10,000?
£100,000?
-
Here you go. Some more numbers for Leave supporters to ignore.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1RD1T8
Since 2016, we've gone into a significantly slower growth path compared to what we were doing before and what other, comparable countries have done since.
Goldman Sachs reckon that's cost us the thick end of £100bn over the past three years.
The amount that we have lost and are continuing to lose would be enough to pay for 1million new nurses. One f**king MILLION new nurses.
Still. We took back control eh? I'm sure you're all chuffed to bits with yourselves.
EDIT. And THAT has come about while we're still in the EU. And the people who told you that wouldn't happen are the same snake oil salesmen telling you that it'll be fine if we have no deal. It won't matter that we consciously choose to make it harder to trade with half a billion if the wealthiest people on the planet, right on our doorstep. Because Liam Fox has negotiated Free Trade deals with Palestine and the Faroe Islands.
Honest question to those still supporting leave. What level of economic loss would convince you to think that you might have been sold a pup? How much of a hit in your own pocket would you say is too much?
£100?
£1000?
£10,000?
£100,000?
It's something your not getting is it, even after 2 years.
It's not about the economics, it's about British sovereignty and immigration.
Your using an economic argument, to argue your ideological views. Instead of just having the spine to admit and argue your ideological viewpoint.
Oh and that slower growth is due uncertainty, NOT DUE TO THE LEAVE VOTE.
That uncertainty is down to mps.
Your again spinning and twisting things.
-
BS
You're ignoring my question. How much would you, personally, be prepared to lose out of your pocket?
I assume it's not a binary thing for you. I assume that you wouldn't want us to Leave if it meant that we all went feral and had to eat rats and grass? I assume there is SOME economic price that you wouldn't pay. I'm merely asking you what it is.
You're wrong by the way, on the cause of our economic slowdown. Shouldn't surprise anyone because you've got previous on deciding your conclusion then ignoring contrary evidence.
Our slowdown started in 2016. Well before MPs had any real involvement in the process. The slowdown started because companies are expecting (with the overwhelming mass of economic theory supporting them) that we are going to be a poorer, less efficient and less connected economy. Uncertainty exacerbates the situation but it is not the root cause. The root cause is that there is no Brexiters that doesn't hurt our economy. Companies have been pricing that in over the past 3 years.
-
Here's the evidence of our slowdown by the way. It started to become noticeable in late 2016. BS, if you have evidence that there was uncertainty due to MPs' actions at that time, do share. Otherwise accept that you're talking nonsense.
(https://www.cer.eu/sites/default/files/body-images/chart1_costofbrexit_24jan19.jpg)
-
Here you go. Some more numbers for Leave supporters to ignore.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1RD1T8
Since 2016, we've gone into a significantly slower growth path compared to what we were doing before and what other, comparable countries have done since.
Goldman Sachs reckon that's cost us the thick end of £100bn over the past three years.
The amount that we have lost and are continuing to lose would be enough to pay for 1million new nurses. One f**king MILLION new nurses.
Still. We took back control eh? I'm sure you're all chuffed to bits with yourselves.
EDIT. And THAT has come about while we're still in the EU. And the people who told you that wouldn't happen are the same snake oil salesmen telling you that it'll be fine if we have no deal. It won't matter that we consciously choose to make it harder to trade with half a billion if the wealthiest people on the planet, right on our doorstep. Because Liam Fox has negotiated Free Trade deals with Palestine and the Faroe Islands.
Honest question to those still supporting leave. What level of economic loss would convince you to think that you might have been sold a pup? How much of a hit in your own pocket would you say is too much?
£100?
£1000?
£10,000?
£100,000?
It's something your not getting is it, even after 2 years.
It's not about the economics, it's about British sovereignty and immigration.
Your using an economic argument, to argue your ideological views. Instead of just having the spine to admit and argue your ideological viewpoint.
Oh and that slower growth is due uncertainty, NOT DUE TO THE LEAVE VOTE.
That uncertainty is down to mps.
Your again spinning and twisting things.
And there’s something you’re not getting either, that is - the difference between the severing of political ties, and with the practicalities of doing so.
It’s all well and good saying we should leave on principle as voted for, but we have to make that actually work.
At the moment, the latter isn’t happening, and ardent leave voters only response is to stick the head in the sand and repeat leave means leave ad infinitum..
-
Except, despite BS's obsession with a Dunkirk Spirit approach, there's no evidence that people voted in the knowledge that there was a trade off between Sovereignty and Economy. They were told over and over and over and over again by the liars in Vote Leave and Leave.EU that leaving meant they could have both. BS might be one of these noble democrats who would be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat fresh air if it meant it was HIS cave. I suspect most folk would be a bit peeved to find that Brexit has already cost the country £6000 and rising for every family of four, and that the predictions are you'll be able to put a zero on that by the mid-2020s.
-
Except, despite BS's obsession with a Dunkirk Spirit approach, there's no evidence that people voted in the knowledge that there was a trade off between Sovereignty and Economy. They were told over and over and over and over again by the liars in Vote Leave and Leave.EU that leaving meant they could have both. BS might be one of these noble democrats who would be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat fresh air if it meant it was HIS cave. I suspect most folk would be a bit peeved to find that Brexit has already cost the country £6000 and rising for every family of four, and that the predictions are you'll be able to put a zero on that by the mid-2020s.
I can't wait for a WTO departure and for us to be successful while the EU implodes on itself as more nations see the light and leave. It will be like the collapse of the soviet union.
-
The Cabinet meeting is dragging on today
-
The Cabinet meeting is dragging on today
Depends how heavy it is. I had to move a shed at the weekend and my backs killing me now.
-
The Cabinet meeting is dragging on today
I get the impression that May is holding them hostage in the hope that Stockholm Syndrome will set in.
-
So the growth tracked pretty much the same until around a year after the referendum, when the mps f**king around became apparent. Funny that, eh?
This whole slower growth economic theory IS caused by undemocratic mps, and media trying to derail the brexit process.
I've said this countless times, if people accepted the result of the referendum after people decided they wanted out after DECADES of EU rule, then we would be now in a much better place.
It was drilled into us over many months, and by many mps that we must consider it carefully, and it was a ONE time vote. People considered it, and like I said, after decades of EU rule, we decided to go it alone.
It's the undemocratic mps like yvette Cooper, whose fault it is that we are in the mess we're in now.
At least brexiteers have the spine to admit the reason they voted the way we did.
-
People voted on philosophical ideals - which is perfectly ok - but the practicalities were far from clear..
How can MPs get 5 or 6 votes in this when the electorate only gets one.?
-
How close are we to Civil unrest?
Everyone is sick to the back teeth of this
Don't forget this is not France, this is the UK.
As Mark E. Smith put it "start the revolution when the pubs shut."
Being serious, it won't happen unless we either leave with no deal or Article 50 is revoked. More likely we'll go through another 1-2 years of the nonsense.
Well so far we have had 1 MP shot and killed. A court case relating to abuse of others. At least 5 letter bombs from the IRA and today this:
https://twitter.com/MetroUK?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
more here:
both devices had notes around them saying 'Leave Means Leave' and 'We will bring Britain to a Standstill'
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC
-
So the growth tracked pretty much the same until around a year after the referendum, when the mps f**king around became apparent. Funny that, eh?
It wasn't put before the MPs until January this year after May delayed it from December. Funny that, eh?
-
So the growth tracked pretty much the same until around a year after the referendum, when the mps f**king around became apparent. Funny that, eh?
It wasn't put before the MPs until January this year after May delayed it from December. Funny that, eh?
When I say mps f**king around, you must realise I include May, and the government.
So excuse my when I say, what's your point?
-
People voted on philosophical ideals - which is perfectly ok - but the practicalities were far from clear..
How can MPs get 5 or 6 votes in this when the electorate only gets one.?
Because, as remainers were quick to point out, parliament is sovereign.
-
So the growth tracked pretty much the same until around a year after the referendum, when the mps f**king around became apparent. Funny that, eh?
It wasn't put before the MPs until January this year after May delayed it from December. Funny that, eh?
When I say mps f**king around, you must realise I include May, and the government.
So excuse my when I say, what's your point?
If that's what you meant to say....it took you a year to realise what a shambles it was??
-
May speaks. It took all day to come up with THAT??
-
And another kick of the can, trying to shift the blame onto Corbyn, does she think the British public are stupid?
-
And another kick of the can, trying to shift the blame onto Corbyn, does she think the British public are stupid?
I think this is all about trying to persuade the ERG to come on board with her deal by threatening them with a softer Brexit, eg a Customs Union.
-
She's already had cross-party talks but wasn't interested in listening to anybody. Does anybody seriously think it'll be different this time? She doesn't listen to her Cabinet, I'm damn sure she won't listen to Corbyn.
If Corbyn has any sense he'll tell her to say publicly what she's willing to talk and/or compromise about before he meets with her. She wouldn't dare do that.
EDIT: A thought just came to me. May offered to resign to get her MP to vote with her. Would Corbyn be able to get May to promise a General Election as the price for him doing that?
-
How can you compromise when a pre condition is still her deal
-
And another kick of the can, trying to shift the blame onto Corbyn, does she think the British public are stupid?
I think this is all about trying to persuade the ERG to come on board with her deal by threatening them with a softer Brexit, eg a Customs Union.
This could well be it. Have the talks, get nowhere then try her vote again.
We seem again further away from leaving.
-
How can you compromise when a pre condition is still her deal
And considering how much he's slagged it off in the past I can't see him agreeing to it. It's May saying 'I'm not listening' all over again.
-
BS.
I'm going to be accused of being condescending here, but let me educate you a little. It's necessary if you're going to get this. Because you have totally misunderstood that graph.
Imagine you are driving down the A1 and you have a tracking device. At the end of you journey, you could download the data and plot a graph of your distance from Donny compared to time after you left.
The graph would generally slope from bottom left toward top right. How fast you were going at any time would be reflected by the slope of the graph at that time - the faster you're driving, the more distance you'll put between you and Donny in a given amount of time.
OK. So in general, if you plot how something is changing with time, the slope of that graph is the speed with which that something is changing.
Right
The graph that I posted shows how much the economy had grown CUMULATIVELY at any point since the end of 2008. Think of it as the economic distance that we have put between us and where we were in 2008.
But what we're talking about is GDP growth rate. THAT is what governs how well the economy is doing at any point in time. It's the speed at which we're getting richer than we were previously. So GDP growth rate is the SLOPE of that graph. The better the economy is doing, the more the graph slopes up towards the top of the page, and vice versa.
Now. Go and have a look at what happened to the slope of that graph just after the Referendum.
Get it?
You were looking for when there was a big difference between the two lines. But that's the wrong way to look at it.
If GDP growth drops, it doesn't mean the size of the economy drops immediately. It means the rate at which we are growing slows down. So you don't necessarily notice it immediately. (But my God do you notice it over a long period...) If you want to identify when the problem arose, you look at where the slopes change and stay different. That means something big has happened to one or other of those economies.
See it? Q3 2016? A few months after the vote?
Here's a simple analogy if you don't get it.
Imagine you had to drive across America. About 5000 km. Imagine you initially drove at an average of 100km/H. Then assume you dropped your speed to 95km/h. You'd barely notice the difference at first. A minute later, you'd have travelled about 1580m, rather than the ~1650m you would have done at 100km/h. It only takes you a couple of seconds to make up that difference so you barely notice it. But now assume that you remain permanently going slower than you'd originally intended. By the time you reach your destination, you've been behind the wheel for 2.5hours longer than if you'd stayed doing 100km/h. You'd notice that. And in the economic case, that delay is the long term loss of wealth that we'll suffer if GDP growth rate stays low. The gap between the line of what we SHOULD be doing and the line of what we ARE doing will get further and further apart. We'll have a future that becomes a lot poorer than it would have been. That means fewer roads repaired. Fewer hospitals built. Fewer coppers and nurses and metal bashers and computer programmers and teachers and doctors employed. Because we won't be able to afford as many as we would have done.
And that's the point. We have, just as experts predicted, gone onto a lower rate of growth since the vote. That wasn't due to the recent uncertainty. It happened pretty much immediately. And it's continuing to happen. And we're now significantly poorer than we would have been if we'd grown like other countries since 2016. To the extent that the average family of 4 has lost about £6.5k overall.
Clearer now?
So I'll ask again. How much would YOU be prepared to lose to take back control.
PS: Here's an irony. I've just heard today that, if we DO have a No Deal Brexit, there's a very strong chance that my own company is going to do very, very well out of it. I can't tell you the details, but it's eye watering sums for us.
But I fervently hope that doesn't happen. Because the effect of No Deal on the country as a whole will be calamitous over the next decade or two, and that's not the country I want to live in.
-
Do you agree that MPs f**king about causing the uncertainty has made it alot worse than it would other wise be?
Did the referendum cause a slow in growth? Yes, but its made worse by the uncertainty, and will be temporary.
This whole thing is about British sovereignty, but all you bleet on about is the slow in growth.
Instead of admitting, you don't like the idea of British sovereignty, the monarchy and the nasty empire,.
You'd prefer a European socialist Republic, (we nearly had one in the 40's)where what we contribute greatly outweighs what we gain.
-
NEW: Just how divided is May’s cabinet? Told there was a vote: 10 cabinet ministers wanted a long ext; 14 wanted a No Deal or a short ext; 2 sat on their hands 1/2
A Cabinet Level crisis meeting and two spineless bas**rds sit on their hands, what ate they doing in Cabinet if they are incapable of making difficult decisions
-
So that's it? No acceptance of what you've just learned. No apology for getting it wrong before? Just move on to the next argument? No thought that you might need to reflect on the way you Marshall facts to come up with conclusions that are sensible?
That's kind of how we got here in the first place.
For what it's worth, yes I do think that what you call "MPs f**king about" and what I call "Parliamentary democratic process" has added to the uncertainty. And that will have an economic effect. But that is a short-term thing. Eventually, this will be resolved and then we'll continue off on whatever long-term economic growth we have.
What MPs are (most of them) doing is trying to flesh out a deal that saves the country from the worst of what you and your Brexit mates have tipped us into. If they find a path to do that, any short term uncertainty (and it HAS only been 3.5 months since Parliament got involved) will be a drop in the ocean compared to the effect of quickly getting it wrong.
Back to car analogies.
You are sat in the back now, screaming at the driver, "Faster! Faster! Put your f**king foot down," as he drives along a poor quality stretch of road.
If the driver drives fast and is unable to miss a pot hole which f**ks the suspension and means you have to do the rest of the journey at half-speed, was that clever? Or would it have been better to slow down for a bit and have a chance of coming out the other side of this stretch with less damage?
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
-
Of all the things I thought might come out of todays 7 hour cabinet meeting this was pretty low down the list - send for Corbyn, let him sort it out!
What is she up to? I dont get the ERG backing her deal argument. If they can concoct something then it will go thro on the back of c120 May loyalists and most of Labour so the ERG are stuffed. If they can't, well they can't, so where is the pressure on the ERG as they reject her deal again and wait to leave with no deal on 11th April?
So what do you do if you are Corbyn? Go in, ask for all the things they voted for last night SM/CU/Ref knowing that if she accepts it will split her party or if she doesn't you can show you tried?
Strange days indeed.
-
For me, it’s an attempt to pass the buck to Corbyn and blame him for the mess, how can someone ask for compromise with pre conditions
-
Would it be possible to put mays deal customs union to the public and let them vote on it or customs union or mays to mps whoever gets the most they go for, might not be possible of course
-
Bpool
Any Ref 2 that doesn't have Remain as an option is fundamentally flawed. For two reasons.
1) If you only have variations of Leave on the ballot, that assumes that EVERYONE who voted Leave in 2016 would have rather had ANY sort of Leave outcome than a Remain outcome. It assumes that people who couldn't get their preferred sort of Leave, wold always plump for ANY other sort of Remain than ever support Leave. THAT is the basic problem with the 2016 Referendum. That assumption was hardwired into the question. And there is no evidence whatsoever that it is a correct assumption.
Whenever I've raised this issue before, the usual suspects tell me I'm talking b*llocks. They say everyone who supported Leave would prefer ANY type of Leave over Remain.
Well... Here's the DUP
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj_ptacurLhAhWluXEKHQ-JCQAQFjADegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2F2019%2Fmar%2F30%2Fdup-deputy-leader-id-rather-stay-in-eu-than-back-theresa-may-deal&usg=AOvVaw3YJIqwfLth7CCIxbS44m-F
Here's the biggest donors to Vote Leave.
https://en-gb.facebook.com/skynews/videos/i-would-rather-remain-in-that-sign-mays-deal/375605746578538/
Oh aye. And here's old Nige.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/nigel-farage-lbc-radio-debate-with-alastair-campbell-1-5785730
2) Folk might just have...changed their minds!?!
-
Here's a good analogy.
Imagine 100 people want to go out for a meal. They have a vote.
Indian or Lasagne.
they vote 52-48 for Indian.
Then there's a massive argument about what Indian food to have. Some people say the Will of The People is to have a Phal. Others say a Korma would be a safer bet. Some others try to compromise with a Madras.
In the end, they decide to put it to a vote. Phal or Korma.
That would be bonkers wouldn't it? Maybe some of the people who voted for an Indian really wanted a Chicken Tikka Masala, and would prefer Lasagne to either Phal or Korma. So why not have Lasagne on the second vote?
THAT is a pretty much exact analogy of the whole bleeding process we've been through over the past 3 years.
-
Jesus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1113185066644013060
Direct rule in NI? The one thing that's guaranteed to destroy the peace that's been painfully built over the past 2 decades.
I'm assuming the Govt have known all along that No Deal=Direct Rule.
If they haven't known it, they are administratively incompetent.
If they have known it, what the f**k did "No Deal is better than a bad deal" mean?
Isnt it now about time that the Leavers got over this emotional spasm and started facing up to responsibility like grown ups do?
-
Bst you sound like your trying to preach to people, your obviously a very Clever man but the way you speak on here is terrible mate, if someone does not agree with you or there is no reason to patranise them, your clearly a big labour voter but you will get more respect not trying to push your views on everyone else even if there right
-
Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.
If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...
Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.
you were way out like every prediction you have made
-
Here's a good analogy.
Imagine 100 people want to go out for a meal. They have a vote.
Indian or Lasagne.
they vote 52-48 for Indian.
Then there's a massive argument about what Indian food to have. Some people say the Will of The People is to have a Phal. Others say a Korma would be a safer bet. Some others try to compromise with a Madras.
In the end, they decide to put it to a vote. Phal or Korma.
That would be bonkers wouldn't it? Maybe some of the people who voted for an Indian really wanted a Chicken Tikka Masala, and would prefer Lasagne to either Phal or Korma. So why not have Lasagne on the second vote?
THAT is a pretty much exact analogy of the whole bleeding process we've been through over the past 3 years.
Why not ask who would like good old Traditional English fish and chips?
-
Here's a good analogy.
Imagine 100 people want to go out for a meal. They have a vote.
Indian or Lasagne.
they vote 52-48 for Indian.
Then there's a massive argument about what Indian food to have. Some people say the Will of The People is to have a Phal. Others say a Korma would be a safer bet. Some others try to compromise with a Madras.
In the end, they decide to put it to a vote. Phal or Korma.
That would be bonkers wouldn't it? Maybe some of the people who voted for an Indian really wanted a Chicken Tikka Masala, and would prefer Lasagne to either Phal or Korma. So why not have Lasagne on the second vote?
THAT is a pretty much exact analogy of the whole bleeding process we've been through over the past 3 years.
That's a pretty shit analogy really Billy, if you've agreed to go to a restaurant you're not going to ask for something that's not on the menu.
Then again, we were promised something that wasn't on the menu when we voted to leave, so you might be onto something...
-
It’s also like a situation where as a family, we decide I should leave my employer but work for them freelance. I agree freelance terms which my employer says are fixed, but when going back to my family they don’t agree. My employer is happy to give me more time to decide or even stay on. My family still can’t agree and the cliff edge approaches with a mortgage to pay..
I know what I would do..
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
Right, let's meet up then and discuss this face to face like grown ups.
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
Right, let's meet up then and discuss this face to face like grown ups.
Why can't grown ups discuss it on a forum?
-
So will Corbyn and May reach a deal? Probably not.
Will a longer extension then happen? Probably.
Interesting point that labour suggest if they get a deal they want they wouldn't put it to a public vote. Amazing change of policy that.
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
Right, let's meet up then and discuss this face to face like grown ups.
I thought I was back on Millwall Online :lol:
-
I'd rather level with no deal - and to hell with it, whatever happens, happens! Two World Wars didn't finish us, not joining the single currency didn't destroy our economy. Voting to leave didn't plunge us into recession. So who knows? The 'experts' might be right and it could be the worst thing we've done - or it could all be exaggerated and ultimately unravel as untrue scaremongering.
Why are you putting quotes around experts? Leading economists in their field are experts, and they're the ones telling us it will put the country back years in terms of economic growth.
No-one in remain is saying things will be like war-time - THAT is scaremongering by leave campaigners, putting words into other people's mouth.
Saying "whatever happens, happens" is a terrible f**king way to run a country! You wouldn't even say that when you make your tea... "I'll just throw everything from the fridge in a pan and whatever happens, happens" And if you're not prepared to do it with a meal, don't f**king dream of doing it with the country ffs
Then again, I'd rather Tony Blair had not allowed immigration numbers to be so high in the first place as then maybe 'Vote Remain' would have won, as you don't have to be Albert Einstein to work out that the mass flow of EU foreigners onto these shores made some folk vote to leave in the first place and gave the likes of Nigel Farage ammunition.
So it's Tony Blair's fault? lol
-
Nobody knows what will happen under any of the ridiculous number of different outcomes - not even the 'experts' who offer their wisdom on this forum, rather than in Westminster.
I'd rather level with no deal - and to hell with it, whatever happens, happens! Two World Wars didn't finish us, not joining the single currency didn't destroy our economy. Voting to leave didn't plunge us into recession. So who knows? The 'experts' might be right and it could be the worst thing we've done - or it could all be exaggerated and ultimately unravel as untrue scaremongering.
Then again, I'd rather Tony Blair had not allowed immigration numbers to be so high in the first place as then maybe 'Vote Remain' would have won, as you don't have to be Albert Einstein to work out that the mass flow of EU foreigners onto these shores made some folk vote to leave in the first place and gave the likes of Nigel Farage ammunition.
It's all a bloody great big mess!
Well said sir.
-
Everyone knows that no one knows what the outcome will be, except for those who think they know.
-
''Brexit: Junior minister resigns over May's 'grave error' in seeking deal with Corbyn – live news''
Not much CONsensus there then.
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
Right, let's meet up then and discuss this face to face like grown ups.
Why can't grown ups discuss it on a forum?
Oh, is that how corbyn and may will cunduct their discussions?
Thought it may be beneficial, as somehow I think bst wouldn't be so preachy, condescending and I'm sure he'd drop his bullying tactics if he wasn't hid behind his keyboard.
The irony being, that's how he thinks grown ups discuss issues.
-
BS.
Don't flatter yourself that you've got the first idea what I think or want. You haven't got the first idea.
Discuss this like a grown up or toddle off and leave it to grown ups to discuss.
Right, let's meet up then and discuss this face to face like grown ups.
Why can't grown ups discuss it on a forum?
Oh, is that how corbyn and may will cunduct their discussions?
Thought it may be beneficial, as somehow I think bst wouldn't be so preachy, condescending and I'm sure he'd drop his bullying tactics if he wasn't hid behind his keyboard.
The irony being, that's how he thinks grown ups discuss issues.
The best way to stand up to BST, not that you have to of course, is to read up on your position what you believe is best for yourself and your country from reputable different sources so you can find holes in his arguments, not easy but that's how debates are won-or not.
-
Ahh, veiled threats from a Brexiteer. What a shocker.
-
And here's me thinking debates are won by describing anyone who disagrees with you as 'not grown up'.
-
BS.
You have an obsession with meeting up. Do you think the points I'm
making would be any less valid or yours any more valid face to face?
BB. No. To disagree with someone you need to have both sides engaged with the discussion. I'd never suggest that anyone who engages in a discussion sensibly isn't grown up.
What got my goat yesterday was BS making a totally unsubstantiated claim, misunderstanding evidence that strongly indicated that his claim was wrong, then, when that misunderstanding was patiently corrected, responding with a rant about me wanting to get rid of the Queen. You reckon that is mature discussion?
-
BB
PS. It's not about "winning" debates by the way. It's about establishing clarity in facts and concepts so that the choices we make are well-founded.
I've no problem whatsoever with anyone coming to a conclusion that's different from mine. What tweaks my nose is when folk try to justify that by things that aren't valid. And yeah, I do OTT when I see that happening, because it's years of that approach that have tipped us into this heap of shite.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
-
BB
Aye. I know. And we've had three years since of trying to a) interpret what that meant and b) implement it in a way that doesn't cripple our economy or throw a hand grenade into Northern Ireland.
It's hard isn't it? Which is why I get a little bit miffed when folk say "just get on with it and leave" whilst refusing to engage with those consequences that were never properly discussed in 2016.
So yeah, I agree that there'd be a lot of people pissed off if that decision was revisited.
Equally, there'll be a lot of people pissed off if the 2016 decision IS implemented and the predictions that have been steadfastly ignored by Leavers come to pass.
It's a right f**king mess isn't it?
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
-
BB
Aye. I know. And we've had three years since of trying to a) interpret what that meant and b) implement it in a way that doesn't cripple our economy or throw a hand grenade into Northern Ireland.
It's hard isn't it? Which is why I get a little bit miffed when folk say "just get on with it and leave" whilst refusing to engage with those consequences that were never properly discussed in 2016.
So yeah, I agree that there'd be a lot of people pissed off if that decision was revisited.
Equally, there'll be a lot of people pissed off if the 2016 decision IS implemented and the predictions that have been steadfastly ignored by Leavers come to pass.
It's a right f**king mess isn't it?
It is mate, and there probably should never have been a vote. People's views of the consequences differ though.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
You voted to leave the European Union and that's all you did. You didn't vote for a platform to negotiate an independent trade deal on WTO rules.
A customs union with the EU is leaving the EU and is a negotiated trade deal with it, and is under WTO rules. It fulfills completely the referendum vote, and doesn't ignore it. So don't present 'no deal' as the only way to leave and what you voted for, because both are demonstrably false.
Given in the real world approximately 50% of all our current trade is with the EU it really makes a lot of sense to get a grown-up deal with them.
All this 'I ticked a box 3 years ago' malarkey breaks down very quickly when you start talking about real peoples lifes and livelihoods.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
I don't remember the ballot paper saying anything about that either!
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
No it didn't.
-
BB
Plus (and I know I keep going on about this, but it IS critical) whichever form of Leave we end up with, a majority of the country will be f**ked off. And that fact invalidates any argument that the 2016 result was a democratic mandate.
As I keep saying, there was no one thing called Leave. So to claim that because 52% voted for Leave, any form of Leave is to be accepted is a logical nonsense.
You don't have to take my word. May's deal would be Leaving, but Farage himself has said he'd prefer us to Remain than leave that way.
-
AL
Thing is, May DID try that approach.
Remember? 2 years ago. No Deal is better than a bad deal?
Thing is, it isn't. No Deal would be bad for the EU but a disaster for us. And for the EU, No Deal is less bad than a deal that undermined the integrity of the EU.
So that threat was tried but it didn't work. Because it wasn't remotely realistic.
And that is the art of negotiating. You don't negotiate from a position that isn't credible. Because the other side will just stonewall you.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
What about the Greater in Greater Manchester?
-
AL
Thing is, May DID try that approach.
Remember? 2 years ago. No Deal is better than a bad deal?
Thing is, it isn't. No Deal would be bad for the EU but a disaster for us. And for the EU, No Deal is less bad than a deal that undermined the integrity of the EU.
So that threat was tried but it didn't work. Because it wasn't remotely realistic.
And that is the art of negotiating. You don't negotiate from a position that isn't credible. Because the other side will just stonewall you.
It was only 'not credible' because TM didn't have the bottle to front up to the EU and walk away if necessary. We could have been well on the way to a new era but for the shambolic performance of the Government and the stop Brexit at all costs mindset of most MPs. I'm convinced it has been dragged on so long in the hope that Brexit fatigue will wear people down and in the end they will just give up.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
What about the Greater in Greater Manchester?
What's great about Manchester? :)
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
-
BS.
You have an obsession with meeting up. Do you think the points I'm
making would be any less valid or yours any more valid face to face?
BB. No. To disagree with someone you need to have both sides engaged with the discussion. I'd never suggest that anyone who engages in a discussion sensibly isn't grown up.
What got my goat yesterday was BS making a totally unsubstantiated claim, misunderstanding evidence that strongly indicated that his claim was wrong, then, when that misunderstanding was patiently corrected, responding with a rant about me wanting to get rid of the Queen. You reckon that is mature discussion?
No, they couldn't be less valid.
It's your execution of said points that would be alot different, without the safety blanket of your keyboard.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
Then you admit a lot of people were misled/misinformed during the referendum campaign?
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
That's how I see it.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
The EU are the ones putting up barriers not us.
-
Well, all I can say is I hope one day you reflect on that statement. We currently essentially have a free trade agreement without any barriers with the EU.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
The EU are the ones putting up barriers not us.
Suppose the UK had a trade deal with (random example) Brazil
Then Brazil said they wanted to pull out of that deal and not make a new deal.
Then the day after the trade deal expired Brazil said let's just send our goods and people just as we did before the deal, no tariffs and border checks.
How do you thnk the UK woud react?
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
Then you admit a lot of people were misled/misinformed during the referendum campaign?
Both camps misled/misinformed people during the campaign. I've never said anything contrary to that.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
Well that's very interesting. Because if I remember my Chomsky correct what you're hinting at is essentially an anarchist system of government.
Instead of lorry's you know filling out their current forms or whatever, or the guy at the airport checking your passport - your proposition Boomstick, If I'm understanding it correctly, is just 'on you go'.
?
-
I would like those people on here, who advocate leaving the EU immediately with no deal, to explain to me precisely, with facts of law and not just opinions, the following:
What would be the status of my immediate family EU citizens living in the UK, and the same question about other relatives who are UK citizens living in the EU.?
With a deal the rights are protected until the end of 2020, and to a degree afterwards under the terms of the deal.
Without a deal, go on, tell me.??
-
I think it's been exemplified by now that certain people don't deal with real world problems like that, IDM.
Thanks f**k, is all I can say, that at least the Dutch government has kept me continuously informed of assurances of my right to live and work in the Netherlands in spite of the failings of my own government.
-
That’s the point though - whilst idealistically leaving the EU politically may be ok and manageable and could be what people voted for,
the practical issues are where it falls over.
To leave we MUST have a deal, period..
-
I see nobody has picked up on Labours red lines on Corbyn's plans to meet the pm to try and find a resolution no longer seem to include a peoples vote at the end of it, if successful..
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
Well that's very interesting. Because if I remember my Chomsky correct what you're hinting at is essentially an anarchist system of government.
Instead of lorry's you know filling out their current forms or whatever, or the guy at the airport checking your passport - your proposition Boomstick, If I'm understanding it correctly, is just 'on you go'.
?
Nothing of the sort, not sure how you got there....
Did you miss the several occasions when the port of calais said they are ready?
-
Some of the comments on here are deeply depressing.
When has the EU EVER said it will blockade our lorries from entering the EU? When has ANYONE ever said that would happen?
What has the EU EVER done to make it harder for us to trade with them? It is US by advocating No deal that are CHOOSING to make trade with the EU harder.
As for both sides lying therefore trust nobody...if you're determined to stick to that then there's nothing ever going to convince you otherwise. One thing IS true though. Only one side of the debate has had people and organisations found guilty of criminal activity during the campaign. But that doesn't seem to concern folk either.
-
I'm of the understanding that family members who lawfully resided here before Brexit will be allowed to stay in the event of no deal.
-
BS
YES. The port of Calais is ready for the considerably more onerous checks that would be necessary if we left without a deal. Checks that would greatly reduce the flow of goods through the port, making every transaction slower and more costly. And making some time-critical export/imports impossible.
They've never said we're ready and everything will be fine.
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
-
I don’t know BB.. these things are covered in any deals, but it is a worry that with no deal all bets are off..
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
Quite right BST. It will inevitably lead to a border poll with a real possibility of a vote to leave the UK. That will highly likely be accompnied by significant increases in division, tension and violence.
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
The Irish have caused us trouble for years. This would be an ideal opportunity for payback if the EU want to put up a border and it wouldn't be our doing.
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
Quite right BST. It will inevitably lead to a border poll with a real possibility of a vote to leave the UK. That will highly likely be accompnied by significant increases in division, tension and violence.
We would need to send in the army to support our people over there.
-
AL.
Argh! How many times? It's NOT the EU putting up a border. WTO rules would REQUIRE there to be a border if we're not part of the EU Customs Union.
It's not the EU playing silly buggers. It's a simple requirement that logically flows for US deciding to leave with No Deal.
And there's the problem. the advocates of No Deal have NEVER ONCE addresses this issue beyond saying "Be reyt." That is precisely what I mean when I say that the advocates of No Deal are not engaging with this like grown ups.
Now, you might be happy with that. You might accept the presence of a hard border between NI and Ireland, with all the knock on effects that would have. But get this. if that DID happen, apart from the risk of trouble in NI, it would also seriously damage the Irish economy and Ireland is a part of the EU. And the EU have said that if that is the case, we can forget any deal that helps US out.
That's perfectly reasonable isn't it? If OUR decision badly affects a member of the EU, why on earth should the EU then help us to mitigate the effects on OUR economy that we have chosen to take on?
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
Well that's very interesting. Because if I remember my Chomsky correct what you're hinting at is essentially an anarchist system of government.
Instead of lorry's you know filling out their current forms or whatever, or the guy at the airport checking your passport - your proposition Boomstick, If I'm understanding it correctly, is just 'on you go'.
?
Nothing of the sort, not sure how you got there....
Did you miss the several occasions when the port of calais said they are ready?
No, I didn't. I pulled a quote out for you.
https://www.politico.eu/article/calais-president-well-be-ready-even-for-a-no-deal-brexit/
"We should do everything to secure a deal. I cannot begin to imagine there not being a deal between the U.K. and the EU. We share too many things to simply stare at one another like statues."
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
The Irish have caused us trouble for years. This would be an ideal opportunity for payback if the EU want to put up a border and it wouldn't be our doing.
Wow. So dense.
-
BST. What is valid is that the country had a vote and voted to leave. What tweaks some folk's noses is when people try to justify that the vote isn't valid. What sort of heap of shite do you think that will leave our country in if they get their way and invalidate the vote?
Democracy is dieing in the UK.
We clearly voted to leave. The ballot paper mentioned nothing about begging for a deal.
We should have activated article 50 the day after the referendum and told the EU we were leaving on WTO terms, BUT if THEY wanted a deal with us to come and talk it over. Who in their right mind goes into a negotiation saying we don't want to leave without a deal, thereby throwing your strongest bargaining chip in the bin?
We should leave now. When we make a success of life outside the EU others will follow our brave lead. The GREAT in Great Britain didn't come about from fannying around makes deals with the likes of Luxembourg, it came from doing our business all throughout the world.
What about the Greater in Greater Manchester?
Leave Man City out of this.😉
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
-
And more evidence for you to ignore of foreign-run campaigns pouring money into directing pro-Brexit advertising into folks' Facebook feed.
Pouring money into it and hiding the source of the money.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
Well that's very interesting. Because if I remember my Chomsky correct what you're hinting at is essentially an anarchist system of government.
Instead of lorry's you know filling out their current forms or whatever, or the guy at the airport checking your passport - your proposition Boomstick, If I'm understanding it correctly, is just 'on you go'.
?
Nothing of the sort, not sure how you got there....
Did you miss the several occasions when the port of calais said they are ready?
No, I didn't. I pulled a quote out for you.
https://www.politico.eu/article/calais-president-well-be-ready-even-for-a-no-deal-brexit/
"We should do everything to secure a deal. I cannot begin to imagine there not being a deal between the U.K. and the EU. We share too many things to simply stare at one another like statues."
Ah, that quote that speaks nothing of the readiness of the port.....
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
-
I agree that that article doesn't add a great deal to the debate.
But you could, for example, take...
the head of the civil service, Mark Sedwill's, views into account that food prices would rise, companies would go bust, and the country would be less safe (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-theresa-may-vote-cabinet-civil-service-mark-sedwill-a8850531.html)
or, the Deputy assistant police commissioner's view also that the country would be less safe (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/11/no-deal-brexit-would-make-britain-less-safe-says-police-chief)
..into account. I mean it's just two senior public servants with I imagine decades of practical experience.
-
And then there's the Irish border issue. How do you solve that with No Deal?
The Irish have caused us trouble for years. This would be an ideal opportunity for payback if the EU want to put up a border and it wouldn't be our doing.
Yeah, it was the EU that voted to chuck us out so they could put up hard borders, wasn't it! :silly:
-
Haven't food prices always risen?
Haven't companies always gone bust?
Isn't the country less safe than it's ever been already?
-
Haven't food prices always risen?
eeer no. Past generations spent a much higher percentage of their income on food compared to what we do today and the wholesale cost of most foods has historically declined over centuries.
But in any case, what a ridiculous set of questions. Do you not get the concept of more or less? Why would you intentionally increase a problem regardless of what general level it stands at before?
"We've got no bog role, love"
"Haven't we been out of bog role for 6 hours?""
"Ya what?"
-
I can see a scenario where May's Deal passes next week.
On Wednesday May goes to the EU Council to request a lengthy extension. All the EU leaders are broadly in favour, except France, which applies the veto.
May goes back to Parliament. Because she is bound by the Cooper Act, which is being rushed through Parliament, leaving without a Deal is now against statute. So May re-presents her deal, and says that if it is rejected, she will have no option but to revoke Article 50 under UK law.
The ERG blink, the DUP don't, but there are enough Labour MPs who reckon they could never look their constituents in the eye again if Article 50 was revoked. Via Labour votes and abstentions, May wins the meaningful vote. We leave the EU on 12th April and move into a transition. May resigns as Tory leader and stays on as caretaker PM ( as Cameron did) until the Tory Party chooses her successor.
Before you say I should join the likes of Michael Dobbs and Jeffrey Archer and write political fiction, just revisit this in 9 days time.
-
Here's a good analogy.
Imagine 100 people want to go out for a meal. They have a vote.
Indian or Lasagne.
they vote 52-48 for Indian.
Then there's a massive argument about what Indian food to have. Some people say the Will of The People is to have a Phal. Others say a Korma would be a safer bet. Some others try to compromise with a Madras.
In the end, they decide to put it to a vote. Phal or Korma.
That would be bonkers wouldn't it? Maybe some of the people who voted for an Indian really wanted a Chicken Tikka Masala, and would prefer Lasagne to either Phal or Korma. So why not have Lasagne on the second vote?
THAT is a pretty much exact analogy of the whole bleeding process we've been through over the past 3 years.
Why not ask who would like good old Traditional English fish and chips?
Thanks Bentley, a perfect example of how intergrated we really are with Europe in many ways of our 'traditions' and have been for centuries.
Fish and chips isn't English, even the Daily Mail says so. Fried potatoes originated in Belgium & fried fish in Spain/Portugal. They were first served together in the UK by a Jewish immigrant from Poland.
http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20130409-chipping-away-at-the-history-of-fish-and-chips
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/food/article-4312420/UK-takeaway-favourite-fish-chips-not-British.html
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
-
TRB,
I certainly think that is a possible outcome.
There is an interesting piece on the shapeshifting in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/03/theresa-may-labour-brexit-old-strategy
I'm afraid sincerity died a long time ago in this debate.
I think Corbyn needs to show willing, but there is no evidence that May has ceased to believe in the importance of her "red lines".
Presentational posturing to manipulate the ERG fundamentalists.
-
I said yesterday that the olive branch to Corbyn was about getting the ERG on board.
There is someone far cleverer than May thinking up this strategy, which probably explains yesterday's very long Cabinet and the curious fact that no Ministers present at that meeting have resigned. I suspect Geoffrey Cox is at the bottom of this, and I think a fiver on him to be next PM could be a decent investment.
-
BST. I reckon the majority of the country end up f**ked off after every vote, through elected governments not carrying out promises.
In fear of repeating myself, I saw only two option on the voting slip. Leave and Remain. I understood it to mean we would either remain or leave immediately and perhaps discuss any future deals with the EU after we had left.
I'm 100% sure I wasn't the only one to think that.
100 percent Definately not the only person to think it, and it should have happened that way.
It's only certain MPs, and parts of the media that are trying to stop brexit that has made this whole process alot harder than it should be.
We should be out now, striking deals with the globe and not looking back.
The only way out is a no deal, but unfortunately it won't happen.
Right, let's take that proposition forward. We just 'leave' now. The very next day - how do you get goods, people, and money across the border to the EU?
Great solutions come out of necessity. Anyway
Do you think the EU would blockade any lorries and ships from the UK?
Why would the EU need to blockade, we would cause the chaos ourselves under WTO terms. According to the Road Haulage Industry this is what would happen:
As it stands, each haulier entering Britain will be required to submit a 40-field declaration form per consignment before travel.
“The form takes 10 minutes to fill out. If you take a large retailer who has 8,000 consignments [in one lorry], that would take 170 people eight hours to process one trailer,” said Richard Burnett, RHA chief executive.
“That is the worst-case scenario. But even if you took the average trailer which has 400 consignments per delivery, that would take nine people eight hours to process.”
“I can’t for the life of me see how this is going to work,” Burnett added, pointing out that 11,000 trucks a day use Dover, triple the amount pre-single market in 1993.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/11/dover-checks-would-take-eight-hours-per-lorry-in-no-deal-brexit
-
Haven't food prices always risen?
eeer no. Past generations spent a much higher percentage of their income on food compared to what we do today and the wholesale cost of most foods has historically declined over centuries.
But in any case, what a ridiculous set of questions. Do you not get the concept of more or less? Why would you intentionally increase a problem regardless of what general level it stands at before?
"We've got no bog role, love"
"Haven't we been out of bog role for 6 hours?""
"Ya what?"
I'm not talking about what percentage of their income past generations spent on food. I'm saying food prices have risen over the years.
What I'm also saying is it is hardly a revelation that companies will go bust. companies will go bust if we stay in the EU.
Oh, and the country is less safe than it's ever been now, so it's hardly a great prophecy.
-
TRB
A leak from Cabinet yesterday said that May's entire demeanour changed when she was told that No Deal would lead to the recomposition of Direct Rule in NI. They said that broke her and turned her against buttering up the ERG.
Might be bullshit to scare the ERG into falling into line, I dunno.
-
Nobody knows what will happen under any of the ridiculous number of different outcomes - not even the 'experts' who offer their wisdom on this forum, rather than in Westminster.
I'd rather level with no deal - and to hell with it, whatever happens, happens! Two World Wars didn't finish us, not joining the single currency didn't destroy our economy. Voting to leave didn't plunge us into recession. So who knows? The 'experts' might be right and it could be the worst thing we've done - or it could all be exaggerated and ultimately unravel as untrue scaremongering.
Then again, I'd rather Tony Blair had not allowed immigration numbers to be so high in the first place as then maybe 'Vote Remain' would have won, as you don't have to be Albert Einstein to work out that the mass flow of EU foreigners onto these shores made some folk vote to leave in the first place and gave the likes of Nigel Farage ammunition.
It's all a bloody great big mess!
Well we do know some of what would happen under no deal. Travel to Europe would be more expensive and time consuming, green cards, passport control, customs checks, health insurance, higher mobile phone costs and working there would be very difficult. Fine if you don't ever want to visit there but why would you want to make it more difficult in the future for young Brits to have the advantages you had?
-
No Rigo. Voting to leave didn't tip us into recession. But it has wiped £100bn off our economic output over the past two and a half years, according to two separate reports last week.
That's 100 infirmaries that we could have paid for, including the salaries of 500 nurses in each one. Or £6000 in tax cuts that we could have given every family in the country. Or 25 projects on the scale of Terminal 5 at Heathrow. Or it could have paid for HS3. Sixteen times over. Or, if you're a military type, 30 QE Class aircraft carriers. Or, if you're a driver, it would pay to replace the entire national motorway network.
That's what we've already lost before we've even left. Gone. Vanished.
That's the scale of the damage that we've inflicted upon ourselves just by the prospect of Brexit, before we even consider the carnage that No Deal would wreak.
I'm utterly bewildered how many people have the response, "Pfft...f**k it," when you put those numbers to them. Like it's just too much trouble to engage with them.
-
TRB
A leak from Cabinet yesterday said that May's entire demeanour changed when she was told that No Deal would lead to the recomposition of Direct Rule in NI. They said that broke her and turned her against buttering up the ERG.
Might be bullshit to scare the ERG into falling into line, I dunno.
She won't butter them up any more. She will present them with the alternative that's been staring them in the face all along. Accept her deal, warts and all, or accept that Brexit won't happen.
The interventions from Mark Sedwill - which was strategically leaked - and from Mark Carney today (not leaked, in a public interview) are designed to show that No Deal is madness. That in itself doesn't bother the ERG, but it does bother Labour MPs who are desperate to avoid both No Deal and another referendum. As I said before, someone much smarter than May is driving this. The talks with Corbyn and the indicative votes are a sideshow. The Cooper Bill is a gift to May, and she'll use it to maximum advantage next week.
-
BST. We can't blame the loss on leaving the EU because we haven't left yet, so what can we blame for the loss?
-
Jesus BB it's like a living death.
It's partly because of the PROSPECT of Brexit. It's because Brexiters is coming. So firms have changed their investment plans. Because after Brexit, whatever form of Brexit we have, the UK will be a less attractive place for firms to do business.
And it's partly because of the big hike in inflation that we had immediately after the vote, because the Pound fell immediately. Because the markets are expecting Britain to be poorer, relative to our competitors, than we would be if we didn't leave the EU. Inflation and currency depreciation that made the raw materials we buy more expensive.
Just like was predicted in would happen before the Referendum in 2016.
And if you respond with, yeah but Osborne said...I swear I will f**king well spontaneously combust.
-
Wow. The façade is collapsing.
https://mobile.twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1113549988598931456
https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1113548595591045123
-
Or maybe TRB is right and it's mind games with the ERG?
-
Or maybe TRB is right and it's mind games with the ERG?
It is. And Labour MPs who are seen as biddable
They have given up on the DUP. They won't move. What they need to move are the ERG (who fear No Brexit) and Labour back benchers in Leave seats who fear another referendum.
-
Jesus BB it's like a living death.
It's partly because of the PROSPECT of Brexit. It's because Brexiters is coming. So firms have changed their investment plans. Because after Brexit, whatever form of Brexit we have, the UK will be a less attractive place for firms to do business.
And it's partly because of the big hike in inflation that we had immediately after the vote, because the Pound fell immediately. Because the markets are expecting Britain to be poorer, relative to our competitors, than we would be if we didn't leave the EU. Inflation and currency depreciation that made the raw materials we buy more expensive.
Just like was predicted in would happen before the Referendum in 2016.
And if you respond with, yeah but Osborne said...I swear I will f**king well spontaneously combust.
But the majority of the population welcomed the prospect of Brexit. My question to you is, once the expected initial reaction of uncertainty which caused the hike in inflation had settled down, would acceptance of the result by the bitter losers have created a more confident reaction from investors?
-
No BB. It wouldn't. Because the projected losses to our economy are nothing to do with acceptance or otherwise of the result by bitter losers. Nor are they to do with the idea that (as some have seriously suggested), remain supporters won't work as hard, because we want the economy to tank and our kids to be poorer, just to be proved right. (Funny, that, as I'm sat at my desk at 23:10, churning out yet more quotes for work...)
The projected losses are to do with simple, textbook economics. If you seriously want to look into this, you should read up on Gravity Trade Models. It's one of the best established areas of economics, and it basically says that trade is greatest between countries that are geographically close and rich. If you put up barriers between countries that are rich and close together you do less trade. You do less trade, your economy does worse. Your economy does worse, you don't end up as wealthy as you would otherwise have done. And no amount of replacement free trade deals with Palestine and the Faroe Islands will make up for the hit we'll take from doing less trade with Europe. Nor will any magic deals that we might do with China, USA and Japan, because they are a lot further away.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_model_of_trade
So, because we're going to do less trade with Europe and going to be a lot less wealthy, companies don't see us as as good a place to invest as they did before 2016. So our economic growth has already taken a big hit.
If you're not interested in reading up on it, then I'm sure you won't be upset next time I suggest that folk grow up and treat this seriously.
-
TRB
I see your argument. But I keep coming back to my point, that, for a hard core of the ERG, this is not, and never has been about Europe. It's about staging a coup on the Tory party. As I keep saying, the very best outcome for them would be a defeated Brexit, with the likes of May and Hammond and Javid and Hunt etc all seen as responsible. Because that gives them the ammunition to kill off that wing of the Tory party and take over.
-
Jesus BB it's like a living death.
It's partly because of the PROSPECT of Brexit. It's because Brexiters is coming. So firms have changed their investment plans. Because after Brexit, whatever form of Brexit we have, the UK will be a less attractive place for firms to do business.
And it's partly because of the big hike in inflation that we had immediately after the vote, because the Pound fell immediately. Because the markets are expecting Britain to be poorer, relative to our competitors, than we would be if we didn't leave the EU. Inflation and currency depreciation that made the raw materials we buy more expensive.
Just like was predicted in would happen before the Referendum in 2016.
And if you respond with, yeah but Osborne said...I swear I will f**king well spontaneously combust.
But the majority of the population welcomed the prospect of Brexit. My question to you is, once the expected initial reaction of uncertainty which caused the hike in inflation had settled down, would acceptance of the result by the bitter losers have created a more confident reaction from investors?
If I'd had to make a decision about the future of my business in the UK at any time over the last three years to move it to the UK, to expand it in the UK or even to close it BrexitCON would have seriously affected that decision.
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
"avoid appearing overtly politically partisan"; Mark Carney? Are you having a laugh? F*ck me, he's more of a Remainer than you.
-
SS
Go on then. Give me an example of where he's been overtly politically partisan.
-
SS
Go on then. Give me an example of where he's been overtly politically partisan.
It all depends on your opinion on what being overtly politically partisan means. Before the referendum, he publicly warned people against voting Brexit, in the same way that Obama came into our country and threatened us that if we voted Brexit, we'd go to the back of the queue for a trade deal.
I think you've got selective amnesia at times.
-
This is the best example of being Covertly Partisan which needs to be addressed.
Facebook Brexit ads secretly run by staff of Lynton Crosby firm
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/03/grassroots-facebook-brexit-ads-secretly-run-by-staff-of-lynton-crosby-firm
Oops nearly forgot 6,059,742 signatures
-
SS
No. He didn't. He, in his position as the man responsible for the stability of the national economy, stated that the economic predictions of Brexiters were negative.
He didn't ever tell people how to vote.
-
It’s strange that some of the big guns in the cabinet are kicking off about her talking to Corbyn, but non have resigned, it all stinks of a trap to frame Corbyn for a bad deal in my opinion
-
SS
Go on then. Give me an example of where he's been overtly politically partisan.
It all depends on your opinion on what being overtly politically partisan means. Before the referendum, he publicly warned people against voting Brexit, in the same way that Obama came into our country and threatened us that if we voted Brexit, we'd go to the back of the queue for a trade deal.
I think you've got selective amnesia at times.
Apparently in your world doing his job properly equates to being 'overtly politically partisan', and advising becomes 'threatening'. If he was able to advise that Brexit was wonderful for the economy, would he still have been partisan?
Or do you think that perhaps the Governor of the Bank Of England, before a referendum that could possibly have a fundamental impact upon how the British economy performs, have told the electorate nothing?
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
-
You may not have voted for economic reasons, but economics will affect you if there is no deal.
If we are going to leave and honour the referendum (voted on principles not details) then it makes total sense to have a deal to thrash out the practicalities.??
-
You may not have voted for economic reasons, but economics will affect you if there is no deal.
If we are going to leave and honour the referendum (voted on principles not details) then it makes total sense to have a deal to thrash out the practicalities.??
Absolutely, I'd love for the country to get a good deal.
But likes been said before, no deal is better than a bad deal.
-
You may not have voted for economic reasons, but economics will affect you if there is no deal.
If we are going to leave and honour the referendum (voted on principles not details) then it makes total sense to have a deal to thrash out the practicalities.??
Absolutely, I'd love for the country to get a good deal.
But likes been said before, no deal is better than a bad deal.
Fortunately for most No-Deal the worst possible result subject to the HoL is off the table, ''No-Deal is better than a bad deal'' is just hype from the brexitCON brigade, there is no worse deal than No-Deal and to show that you have done your homework BS you could explain to us within the realms of commonsense what a worse deal than No-Deal looks like.
-
In the real world all problems are successfully solved eventually by negotiation. I've not seen one politician on the Brexit side convince me that they are capable of forming a group to solve this.
I voted leave because I didn't want a more federal Europe but from what I have seen in the last three years, I would rather now remain and fight for change from the inside.
I had some remainers telling me I was xenophobic,racist or stupid.
I now have Brexiteers telling me that I knew exactly what I was voting for and we need a hard Brexit.
Like many more I never for a minute expected a chance of leaving without a negotiated deal of some sorts.
-
In the real world all problems are successfully solved eventually by negotiation. I've not seen one politician on the Brexit side convince me that they are capable of forming a group to solve this.
I voted leave because I didn't want a more federal Europe but from what I have seen in the last three years, I would rather now remain and fight for change from the inside.
I had some remainers telling me I was xenophobic,racist or stupid.
I now have Brexiteers telling me that I knew exactly what I was voting for and we need a hard Brexit.
Like many more I never for a minute expected a chance of leaving without a negotiated deal of some sorts.
Was it maybe because something like this was what you listened to at the time, Idler?
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1113547733300842497.html
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6885363/MP-jailed-lying-speeding-case-helped-ram-Bill-stop-No-Deal-ONE-VOTE.html
Shouldn't even be allowed in parliament other than to clean the bogs and I wouldn't trust her doing that.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
-
here's the headline: Fury as disgraced ex-Labour MP Fiona Onasanya helps Remainer rebels to victory by ONE VOTE on law to stop No Deal Brexit
And here's two bullet points directly underneath:
- Last night she cast the deciding vote for Bill that will force the PM to delay Brexit
- 14 remain Tory MPs also backed the Bill including ex-Chancellor Ken Clarke
So her vote was the deciding vote, not the 14 Tory MP's the rebelled against this dreadful government
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How come parliament has had multiple votes on brexit, but it’s only ok for population to have only one.?
How is it ok that MPs like boris Johnson can change minds from publicly opposing May’s deal in the national press, to supporting it on the third vote, yet the public can’t change theirs or be given the opportunity to do so.?
3 years is a long time. All those 16/17 year olds in 2016 denied a one-off vote about their future are now of age to vote whilst brexit hasn’t happened yet..
Where does that make sense.??
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How come parliament has had multiple votes on brexit, but it’s only ok for population to have only one.?
How is it ok that MPs like boris Johnson can change minds from publicly opposing May’s deal in the national press, to supporting it on the third vote, yet the public can’t change theirs or be given the opportunity to do so.?
3 years is a long time. All those 16/17 year olds in 2016 denied a one-off vote about their future are now of age to vote whilst brexit hasn’t happened yet..
Where does that make sense.??
As Boris is a certifiable w**ker I don't think anyone cares how many times he changes his mind any more he is now irrelevant.
-
It’s not that he and others have changed their minds, it’s that they have the opportunity to do so whereas we don’t.
-
In the real world all problems are successfully solved eventually by negotiation. I've not seen one politician on the Brexit side convince me that they are capable of forming a group to solve this.
I voted leave because I didn't want a more federal Europe but from what I have seen in the last three years, I would rather now remain and fight for change from the inside.
I had some remainers telling me I was xenophobic,racist or stupid.
I now have Brexiteers telling me that I knew exactly what I was voting for and we need a hard Brexit.
Like many more I never for a minute expected a chance of leaving without a negotiated deal of some sorts.
Thanks Idler, you bring calm and considered comments to what can be a highly charged debate.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How come parliament has had multiple votes on brexit, but it’s only ok for population to have only one.?
How is it ok that MPs like boris Johnson can change minds from publicly opposing May’s deal in the national press, to supporting it on the third vote, yet the public can’t change theirs or be given the opportunity to do so.?
3 years is a long time. All those 16/17 year olds in 2016 denied a one-off vote about their future are now of age to vote whilst brexit hasn’t happened yet..
Where does that make sense.??
16/17 year olds were 'denied' a vote because they are kids. The legal age for voting should be at least 21, even then most of them are only interested in I-phones. Voting should be for people in work.
-
Christ...
-
It’s not that he and others have changed their minds, it’s that they have the opportunity to do so whereas we don’t.
Brexit itself is not rational IDM which makes it impossible to argue for, when you look back through the pages of this thread whenever a direct question is asked such as what do you want or how will things be ok or .......... the debate mysteriously moves on to the next irrational statement.
-
Christ...
No just a sad millwall supporter
-
''In the Lords the supporters of the Cooper bill have won a second vote. A move to hold up the bill proposed by the Tory Lord Forsyth has been defeated by 254 votes to 94 - a majority of 160''
Is this is not the end, not even the beginning of the end but perhaps the end of the conservative party.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How come parliament has had multiple votes on brexit, but it’s only ok for population to have only one.?
How is it ok that MPs like boris Johnson can change minds from publicly opposing May’s deal in the national press, to supporting it on the third vote, yet the public can’t change theirs or be given the opportunity to do so.?
3 years is a long time. All those 16/17 year olds in 2016 denied a one-off vote about their future are now of age to vote whilst brexit hasn’t happened yet..
Where does that make sense.??
16/17 year olds were 'denied' a vote because they are kids. The legal age for voting should be at least 21, even then most of them are only interested in I-phones. Voting should be for people in work.
They got the vote in Scotland’s independence referendum..
Over 21.? In work.?? What’s next, men only.??
-
Bit surprised at you saying you think all the retired pensioners who voted Leave shouldn't have had a vote, AL.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How come parliament has had multiple votes on brexit, but it’s only ok for population to have only one.?
How is it ok that MPs like boris Johnson can change minds from publicly opposing May’s deal in the national press, to supporting it on the third vote, yet the public can’t change theirs or be given the opportunity to do so.?
3 years is a long time. All those 16/17 year olds in 2016 denied a one-off vote about their future are now of age to vote whilst brexit hasn’t happened yet..
Where does that make sense.??
16/17 year olds were 'denied' a vote because they are kids. The legal age for voting should be at least 21, even then most of them are only interested in I-phones. Voting should be for people in work.
Agreed, to a certain extent.
I'd make voters pass an iq test before they get the right to vote.
Probably be the end of Labour though...
-
Funny that.
When I pointed out the established fact that the older voters were and the lower their highest level of education, the more likely they were to have voted Leave, I had a torrent of abuse thrown at me. I was told I was a f**king disgrace for calling Leave supporters thick.
I assume those who got really upset about that in 2016 will be calling out BS for this latest contribution?
-
Funny that.
When I pointed out the established fact that the older voters were and the lower their highest level of education, the more likely they were to have voted Leave, I had a torrent of abuse thrown at me. I was told I was a f**king disgrace for calling Leave supporters thick.
I assume those who got really upset about that in 2016 will be calling out BS for this latest contribution?
Unfortunately BS has fallen for another wind up from millwall, another own-goal from Brexitcon.
-
''The closure motion has been approved, by 227 votes to 111 - a majority of 116.
Peers are now voting on Lord Forsyth’s main amendment to the Hayter business motion. It says the normal Lords procedures should apply to the Cooper bill, instead of the fast-track ones proposed by Hayter.
After the Forsyth amendment, there are six more from Brexiters. At this rate, if peers try to debate all of them, and they are all subject to a closure motion vote and then a vote on the motion, this process could drag on half the afternoon''
leave means verbal diarrhea, come on guys you're better than this, tell how the sun will shine every day and we'll all live happily ever after.
-
Bit surprised at you saying you think all the retired pensioners who voted Leave shouldn't have had a vote, AL.
Well of course they should because they've already done their years of work paying in for nothing in return.
-
Christ...
No just a sad millwall supporter
Not sad, i'm as happy as can be.
-
Funny that.
When I pointed out the established fact that the older voters were and the lower their highest level of education, the more likely they were to have voted Leave, I had a torrent of abuse thrown at me. I was told I was a f**king disgrace for calling Leave supporters thick.
I assume those who got really upset about that in 2016 will be calling out BS for this latest contribution?
You never cease to amaze me, how someone starts somewhere, and you end up somewhere else.
You being ageist, is a separate issue.
Iq by the way, is not dependent on education.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
-
''The closure motion has been approved, by 227 votes to 111 - a majority of 116.
Peers are now voting on Lord Forsyth’s main amendment to the Hayter business motion. It says the normal Lords procedures should apply to the Cooper bill, instead of the fast-track ones proposed by Hayter.
After the Forsyth amendment, there are six more from Brexiters. At this rate, if peers try to debate all of them, and they are all subject to a closure motion vote and then a vote on the motion, this process could drag on half the afternoon''
leave means verbal diarrhea, come on guys you're better than this, tell how the sun will shine every day and we'll all live happily ever after.
Even some Remain supporters think the Cooper Bill is a pile of you know what.
If the Lords isn't going to revise badly drafted and rushed legislation there isn't really much point in having a Second Chamber.
-
I'm not clicking a Mail link, but I'm going to assume that article conveniently ignores the Brexiteer Tory MP who pleaded guilty to expenses fiddling who voted the other way. Although it's nice to see you finally care about fair and legal votes...
Any MP who gets a criminal conviction should forfeit their seat and not be allowed to stand again until after the next General Election.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red, another member of the backslappers club, all congratulating each other on being masters of the Universe.
There must be at least 6 of you now.
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.
-
They're known as the Britain Surrendering Together party. Here's their anthem to their leader.
https://youtu.be/FqDZOekUDzE
-
May to make written offer to Labour setting out the proposals she plans to put to MP's, which will include plans for a vote on a 'confirmatory referendum'.
Brexiteer MP's said to be furious and attempting to destablilise PM.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/theresa-may-to-make-written-brexit-offer-to-jeremy-corbyn
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.
6,063,705 signatures
-
I see the 'neutral' BBC's line up on Question time tonight is:
Pro Remain = 4
Leave = 1
Oh, and not forgetting the ever so neutral chairmanperson!
-
The 'left behind'
''Matthew Goodwin and Rob Ford coined the term 'The Left Behind' to refer to 'older, white, socially conservative voters in more economically marginal neighbourhoods'.[28] Analysing data the day after the Referendum, Ford concluded that 'Such voters had turned against a political class they saw as dominated by socially liberal university graduates with values fundamentally opposed to theirs, on identity, Europe – and particularly immigration.' This was described in as "if you've got money, you vote in... if you haven't got money, you vote out".[29] In looser terms, these groups' wider dissatisfaction with the major political parties also had a significant impact on the vote – with a particular focus placed on Labour's decline in support in the working class heartlands where it saw a significant number of votes lost to UKIP and the Conservatives in 2015.[30]''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.
6,063,705 signatures
I wonder how many people asked to sign told them to f**k off?
-
The 'left behind'
''Matthew Goodwin and Rob Ford coined the term 'The Left Behind' to refer to 'older, white, socially conservative voters in more economically marginal neighbourhoods'.[28] Analysing data the day after the Referendum, Ford concluded that 'Such voters had turned against a political class they saw as dominated by socially liberal university graduates with values fundamentally opposed to theirs, on identity, Europe – and particularly immigration.' This was described in as "if you've got money, you vote in... if you haven't got money, you vote out".[29] In looser terms, these groups' wider dissatisfaction with the major political parties also had a significant impact on the vote – with a particular focus placed on Labour's decline in support in the working class heartlands where it saw a significant number of votes lost to UKIP and the Conservatives in 2015.[30]''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit
I never realised 52% of the voters were THAT rich!
-
The BBC Remain V Brexit football match has yet to announce the line-ups, but it is understood the Remain formation will be 4-4-2.
The Leave formation is expected to be 2-0-0.
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.
6,063,705 signatures
I wonder how many people asked to sign told them to f**k off?
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
-
Aaaaaaannnnndddddd, I wonder how many have told them to f**k off?
-
Did you see Question time tonight? Apparently, the 1 Leave supporter against 4 Remainers on the panel was balanced because the audience was evenly split (allegedly)! That's like saying a polo match involving a full side of 4 players against one opposition player was evenly matched because the crowd watching was evenly split! As ridiculously biased as that is, it goes further when the referee sways towards the team with 4 players!!!
-
Aaaaaaannnnndddddd, I wonder how many have told them to f**k off?
That's no way to conduct yourself on a family forum bb, frustrated by recent events? I know you must be feeling let down, I know if I had signed up to this only to find out I'd been lied to on an industrial scale I'd want my money back too. Remain calm and carry on is the best medicine.
''Leaked emails show infiltration fears before attempt to oust Grieve''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/leaked-emails-show-infiltration-fears-before-dominic-grieve-tory-confidence-vote
Inquiry launched into data use from no-deal Brexit ads on Facebook
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/inquiry-launched-into-data-use-from-no-deal-brexit-ads-on-facebook
-
Sydney. I fully understand your policy of posting selected links in your attempt to convince others that they are wrong, but I can guarantee as a fact, not just an opinion that it is you that's wrong this time. I didn't vote to leave, I voted to remain. The fact that I believe in democracy and accept a democratic vote, whereas you obviously don't, is the main gist of why I think your opinions are fundamentally flawed.
Did you see Question Time tonight?
-
Sydney. I fully understand your policy of posting selected links in your attempt to convince others that they are wrong, but I can guarantee as a fact, not just an opinion that it is you that's wrong this time. I didn't vote to leave, I voted to remain. The fact that I believe in democracy and accept a democratic vote, whereas you obviously don't, is the main gist of why I think your opinions are fundamentally flawed.
Did you see Question Time tonight?
No I missed QT. I understand that you voted to stay but everyone understands that the leave vote was a narrow victory in a fairly low turn-out (no compulsory voting = low turn-out)
The main point of contention of those that voted to remain in Europe, apart from the majority of experts in many fields telling us we would be better off in, and the huge positive for all that there has been no war within the EU and it's unlikely that an outside country would want to take that option because we consist of 28 United countries is that ........ (deep breath) ................. there has been a concerted effort to poison the well, to stir up trouble within the UK to get people to vote leave, This is an undeniable fact and most reasonable people would/could see that it played a large part in getting the No vote up.
Do you agree with this or not?
If you do agree then the next step logical would be to support those that want the country to have a legitimate vote where everyone fully understands what they are voting for and what is at stake.
If you don't agree it would be good for you to explain to me and the forum, (not that you have to of course as I stated in an earlier post most leavers faced with direct questions ignore them or change the subject) in common sense terms why not. This is an open question to anyone on the forum leave or not.
PS: I put up posts relevant to the subject in hand mostly on topic from credible sources and yes helpful in supporting my arguments. I don't really have time to read partisan articles from sources that have a history of being bias, inaccurate, just plain wrong or have engaged in illegal activities. Why would anyone want to read them anyway?
-
Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.
-
Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.
Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.
Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.
On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.
-
So now May is asking the EU for an extension to 30 June, still hoping that we can agree a deal and leave by 23 May, but is willing to put up candidates for the European elections..
I can’t see how a resolution can be reached in a couple of months having failed over almost 3 years.?
The EU may offer a 12 month flexible extension..
-
And the press are referring to it as a flextension.
I can't f**king wait for the whole thing to be done with either way so that we can stop making up f**king stupid words.
-
Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.
Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.
Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.
On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.
That point about Govt making the right choices is key BFYP.
Govts make choices for political reasons. And the established fact is that twice under Tory Govts (once in the 90s, and right now) South Yorkshire has slipped into the list of the poorest regions in the EU. Directly as the result of those political choices.
The EU Structural Fund is very important here, precisely because it is NOT decided politically. Regions AUTOMATICALLY get funding when their economy dips below a certain level, in order to get them firing again. It's not about politicians deciding that the money would be better spent in London than Donny.
I hear your comment about it being better if the decisions were made at home. I hear it a lot. It is a very idealistic one. And the record shows that, when politicians make decisions at home for political reasons, the outcomes are often grossly unfair. The EU Structural Fund was set up precisely to counter that.
By leaving the EU, South Yorkshire is going to lose €3.3bn of EU Structural Fund investment over the next 7 years. We've taken back control, great. But does anyone think our Tory Govt is going to find even a tenth of that amount of money to give to SY?
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
-
And off we go down the road again.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1114080691518627840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1114080691518627840&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk-politics-47825841
Brilliant surreal comic comment on Twitter last week.
Picture the scene. Last week of March 2519.
The PM of the UK goes to Brussels to prostrate themselves in front of the President of Europe and plead for the annual extension of Article 50. Hundreds of giggling tourists taking photos of the ritual spectacle whose origins have been forgotten in the mists of history.
-
Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.
Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.
Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.
On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.
That point about Govt making the right choices is key BFYP.
Govts make choices for political reasons. And the established fact is that twice under Tory Govts (once in the 90s, and right now) South Yorkshire has slipped into the list of the poorest regions in the EU. Directly as the result of those political choices.
The EU Structural Fund is very important here, precisely because it is NOT decided politically. Regions AUTOMATICALLY get funding when their economy dips below a certain level, in order to get them firing again. It's not about politicians deciding that the money would be better spent in London than Donny.
I hear your comment about it being better if the decisions were made at home. I hear it a lot. It is a very idealistic one. And the record shows that, when politicians make decisions at home for political reasons, the outcomes are often grossly unfair. The EU Structural Fund was set up precisely to counter that.
By leaving the EU, South Yorkshire is going to lose €3.3bn of EU Structural Fund investment over the next 7 years. We've taken back control, great. But does anyone think our Tory Govt is going to find even a tenth of that amount of money to give to SY?
100% agree with this. I don't understand why the areas that receive the most funding from the EU seem to be the highest leave voting areas though? Don't bite off the hand that feeds.
-
The degree of national humiliation in this letter is of historic magnitude. We have utterly humiliated ourselves from start to finish.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexForsythBBC/status/1114073617657204736
Here's a plain interpretation.
In 2016, we voted Leave without having a clue what Leave meant. I, without any consultation, interpreted it to mean what I wanted it to mean. I spent two years negotiating a deal with you to implement this, knowing all the time it didn't have a chance of getting support in Parliament. I delayed the time for Parliament to give its verdict until the very last moment, then had to come and ask you for more time.
I've now, finally, after 30 months, started doing what I should have done at the start, which is to consult with Parliament to find an acceptable compromise deal. We won't be able to do that before the 12 April deadline that you and I agreed last week and I note that you said the alternative is a one year extension to give us time to sort our incompetent shite out. So I'm now asking you for a 3 month extension. Which will not be time to sort out anything, meaning we'll be back here again in June.
Yours etc...
Look back through history. Ask yourself when a British PM has so spectacularly mismanaged an issue of such importance and led us into such a national humiliation.
-
No massive fan of Sturgeon, but when someone's right, they're right...
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1114094310285246464
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?
Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?
Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.
He hasn't said that's what's going to happen... it's a simple question, not sure why you refuse to answer?
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?
Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.
No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.
It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.
I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring what your limit actually is.
You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.
The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.
So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?
You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?
How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?
Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.
No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.
It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.
I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring what your limit actually is.
You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.
The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.
So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?
You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?
How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?
Like I said, I didn't vote leave on economic reasons, so my mind won't change because of them.
You have bleeted on about these so called experts predicting what will happen to the economy, and how. It may affect each household. Those predicted affects haven't changed my mind.
Let's flip this on its head, how much control are you willing to give the EU?
Are you willing to adopt the euro?
Are you willing to take millions on millions of immigrants?
Are you OK about the creation of an EU army?
Are you willing to continue adopting EU laws with out proper representation?
Are you willing to accept more ghettos like page hall forming?
Are you willing to allow huge amounts of strain being put of the NHS and other services, and infrastructure on our small island?
-
Boomstick.
Ok. So I assume that you WOULD be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat grass in order to take back control. Glad we've got that sorted. That puts you into a tiny, fanatical minority.
Me?
No, I don't want us to accept the Euro. Or have an EU army. Neither of those things are going to be imposed on us, so they are hypothetical, but I e answered them anyway.
I'm happy to cede a certain amount of legislative control because of the benefits we get.
Immigration. We need immigration. My wife is an immigrant's daughter. My mother is an immigrant's granddaughter. I assume you have a similar background. I'm not sure what you mean by "millions and millions" so that's a bit of a pointless question. 1? Yes. 100? No. And we can currently control levels if we choose to.
NHS and services? That's a UK Govt decision. It's well established that immigration makes us wealthier. If this Govt chooses not to use that wealth to properly fund services, that's our problem, not one caused by the EU.
There you go. That's how you answer questions. Shame you won't join in but there you go.
-
The way I look at it the leave campaign grossly exaggerated their ability to control immigration after a brexit to attract certain elements.
You also can’t tar all immigrants with the same brush either.
Anyone that is willing to work hard,pay taxes and integrate should be welcomed.
Any that make no effort and just want benefits should be rejected, we have enough of those that can trace their ancestry back here generations.
I saw a woman from Rotherham on TV once complaining about immigrants pinching our benefits. This was someone grossly overweight that didn’t work.
-
Another expert opinion to be ignored.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801
Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark
You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.
If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.
Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.
Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.
Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?
And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.
Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.
That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.
So let me get this right BS.
You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?
Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?
Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.
No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.
It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.
I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring what your limit actually is.
You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.
The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.
So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?
You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?
How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?
Like I said, I didn't vote leave on economic reasons, so my mind won't change because of them.
You have bleeted on about these so called experts predicting what will happen to the economy, and how. It may affect each household. Those predicted affects haven't changed my mind.
Let's flip this on its head, how much control are you willing to give the EU?
Are you willing to adopt the euro?
Are you willing to take millions on millions of immigrants?
Are you OK about the creation of an EU army?
Are you willing to continue adopting EU laws with out proper representation?
Are you willing to accept more ghettos like page hall forming?
Are you willing to allow huge amounts of strain being put of the NHS and other services, and infrastructure on our small island?
Exactly. Why can the remainers not understand all of your points?
-
Boomstick.
Ok. So I assume that you WOULD be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat grass in order to take back control. Glad we've got that sorted. That puts you into a tiny, fanatical minority.
Me?
No, I don't want us to accept the Euro. Or have an EU army. Neither of those things are going to be imposed on us, so they are hypothetical, but I e answered them anyway.
I'm happy to cede a certain amount of legislative control because of the benefits we get.
Immigration. We need immigration. My wife is an immigrant's daughter. My mother is an immigrant's granddaughter. I assume you have a similar background. I'm not sure what you mean by "millions and millions" so that's a bit of a pointless question. 1? Yes. 100? No. And we can currently control levels if we choose to.
NHS and services? That's a UK Govt decision. It's well established that immigration makes us wealthier. If this Govt chooses not to use that wealth to properly fund services, that's our problem, not one caused by the EU.
There you go. That's how you answer questions. Shame you won't join in but there you go.
How many immigrants is enough? In fact how many people is enough regardless of where they are from? You only have to drive through Auckley for example to see how the area has been ruined by over development. I don't want to see houses, shops and roads every time I look out of the window. Who wants to live in a concrete jungle where you can't get to see a doctor because the list is a mile long, or a journey into town takes an hour because of the volume of traffic? Over population is the number one problem facing the world today, regardless of what colour they are or where they come from.
-
So May is going to ask for an extension to 30th June. What's the betting that the EU will say no to that but offer a longer extension, with the possibility of leaving earlier if we agree a deal?
Those EU Elections are going to be fun!
-
I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!
We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.
6,063,705 signatures
I wonder how many of the people on here that signed that pathetic petition, also signed the petition to get the drugs needed to treat people suffering with cystic fibrosis; not many I'll bet.
Some people need to get their priorities right.
-
Steve, if we are poore as a country prescribed drugs will be hit.
-
Boomstick.
Ok. So I assume that you WOULD be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat grass in order to take back control. Glad we've got that sorted. That puts you into a tiny, fanatical minority.
Me?
No, I don't want us to accept the Euro. Or have an EU army. Neither of those things are going to be imposed on us, so they are hypothetical, but I e answered them anyway.
I'm happy to cede a certain amount of legislative control because of the benefits we get.
Immigration. We need immigration. My wife is an immigrant's daughter. My mother is an immigrant's granddaughter. I assume you have a similar background. I'm not sure what you mean by "millions and millions" so that's a bit of a pointless question. 1? Yes. 100? No. And we can currently control levels if we choose to.
NHS and services? That's a UK Govt decision. It's well established that immigration makes us wealthier. If this Govt chooses not to use that wealth to properly fund services, that's our problem, not one caused by the EU.
There you go. That's how you answer questions. Shame you won't join in but there you go.
Haha, my god what are you blithering on about yet again.
How does accepting what your so calldled experts have predicted, put me in a fanatical minority.
Your very out of touch if you think that, I suggest you put down your socialist workers rag, and engage in the real world.
How much legislative control are you willing to cede? What benefits will it bring.
The euro WILL eventually be forced on us and there WILL be an EU army, the EU has expressed a big desire for both.
You don't want them, you say. But if you want us to stay in the EU, you better accept this.
The EU DOES impose immigration on us, do how does our limited infrastructure cope? You claim immigration makes us wealthier, is that to the tune of tens of billions that will be needed to fund extra police, roads, the NHS, schools, councils, housing.
Explain how the government funds this without raising taxes to eye watering amounts, and butting the brunt of the impact on middle England.
Your answers fell well short of any semblance of thought or reason.
YOU are the fanatic, who keeps contradicting yourself with waffle piffle and flannel. I however have given straight answers to loaded, long winded questions.
Try answering my questions again, but put some thought into it
Oh and you still haven't answered my question on how you resolve the issue of ghettos like page Hall forming, and how it has devestated local residents lives
-
Steve, if we are poore as a country prescribed drugs will be hit.
If you believe the doom and gloom merchants on here Idler, but I don't. Come on mate, you're a similar age to me. When we were kids, we were on rations, but we got by.
This country went through 2 World Wars, and still managed to put food on the table. Does anybody honestly think we're all going to starve because of a bunch of w*nkers each side of the Channel?
-
The talks with Labour have broken down. Basically May offered nothing. What a pity the Tories didn't kick her out after her disastrous performance in 2017. If ever a PM with vision was needed it's now.
-
Steve, if we are poore as a country prescribed drugs will be hit.
If you believe the doom and gloom merchants on here Idler, but I don't. Come on mate, you're a similar age to me. When we were kids, we were on rations, but we got by.
This country went through 2 World Wars, and still managed to put food on the table. Does anybody honestly think we're all going to starve because of a bunch of w*nkers each side of the Channel?
Thing is, we had a united 'British Bulldog' attitude back then. Nowadays, we have a 'Britain Surrendering Together' element among us.
If we were all united in BB virtues instead of the BST element we'd have frightened the shit out of the EU.
-
Looking like it was just a last ditch attempt to smear blame on Corbyn and Labour for the mega clusterf**k than May has supervised.
The most telling aspect is the lack of high profile resignations from Cabinet.
As it is well known that there is complete disagreement within Cabinet about the policy and the implementation of the Maybot, the failure to declare seems to indicate an agreement to snare Labour and deflect blame from the guilty and incompetent.
Roll on the next farrago!
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
-
SS
I'm constantly bemused by this belief of Leave supporters that the economic problems won't be bad when we leave.
Serious question. This is not trying to make a point, it's me trying to understand the thinking going on here.
What evidence this idea that the economics won't be bad based on? Every major economist, apart from the one who freely admits that his ideas would lead to the end of industry in the North (and whose policies DID cripple industry in the North when Thatcher implemented them) says the negative effects are going to be very real and very serious. Why do you think they won't be?
Or do you accept that we're going to have a less economically successful future, but that's ok with you?
In which case, are you saying that because you experienced rationing, your happy for your great grandkids to have a poorer future than they should have?
-
The economics are the reason I think we should go for Common Market 2.0. It's a neat compromise. Unfortunately May ruled it out and now everyone has become entrenched.
I think it's a great pity that the Remain side didn't get behind this rather than spending three years trying to overturn the Referendum result. We get the economic benefits, solve the Irish Border problem and avoid the closer political union which the EU will inevitably demand. I think a lot of the eastern European countries would have joined us and we could have been seen as a leader.
-
TRB
1) Nearly half the MPs voted for the sort of arrangement you're saying you want. Plus, presumably you accept that some have different opinions to you. Isn't it a bit OTT to scream that they are all venal and corrupt?
2) it's deeply depressing that you, one of the most intelligent people in here, are repeating this nonsense about us being forced into the Euro or a European army. If either of those things were forced on us, I too would want us to leave. But they are not, and there is no prospect of them being. Basing opinion of the EU now on a hypothetical and unrealistic future EU is irrational, and God knows we need more rationality these days.
-
TRB
Remaining in the CU and very close alignment with the SM has been Labour party policy for 2 years. The door was open at any point in that time for May to reach out. Complaining about both sides in Parliament doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
-
TRB
Remaining in the CU and very close alignment with the SM has been Labour party policy for 2 years. The door was open at any point in that time for May to reach out. Complaining about both sides in Parliament doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Labour does not want to remain in the Single Market, because the State Aid rules will prevent wholesale renationalisation. It wants close alignment on the bits it likes, eg workers' rights and the environment. For me, staying in the Single Market, not just for goods, is the most important thing. I'd be happy to leave a Customs Union if it wasn't for the Irish Border.
-
TRB
1) Nearly half the MPs voted for the sort of arrangement you're saying you want. Plus, presumably you accept that some have different opinions to you. Isn't it a bit OTT to scream that they are all venal and corrupt?
2) it's deeply depressing that you, one of the most intelligent people in here, are repeating this nonsense about us being forced into the Euro or a European army. If either of those things were forced on us, I too would want us to leave. But they are not, and there is no prospect of them being. Basing opinion of the EU now on a hypothetical and unrealistic future EU is irrational, and God knows we need more rationality these days.
They rejected CM2.0 when Boles proposed it, because so many of them are fixated on another referendum. They would rather play games than accept anything that isn't 100% what they want. They are a disgrace.
PS. There will be an EU Army within five years.
https://mobile.twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1062433746123739136?lang=en
-
TRB
1) 185 Labour MPs voted for CM2.0. 25 voted against.
33 Tory MPs voted for CM2.0. 228 voted against.
Draw your own conclusions on where you political home is Comrade.
2) Barring Trump doing something stupid with NATO, there will no EU army that is anything more than a token gesture in my lifetime. Equally, the UK could never and would never be forced into the Euro.
As I said, if events proved me wrong on either of those points, I would want to leave the EU. But choosing to leave because they might happen just seems daft to me.
-
I'm not blaming Labour particularly. The Tories form the Government and they are responsible for the mess we are in. But what about TIG/ Change UK / Funny Tinge? They all stood on manifestos claiming to respect the result. They voted against CM2.0 because they wanted a second referendum at all costs. The SNP also did so, because they want to establish the principle that you hold referendums until you get the result you want.
For the record, comrade, I won't be voting Tory in the next GE or in the Euro Elections, if they happen. I won't be voting Labour, Lib Dem, Funny Tinge or UKIP (now a fully owned subsidiary of Tommy Robinson plc) either. I'll be voting for a party which is economically and socially liberal and wants to deliver Brexit. Anyone know of one?
-
BST: ''I'm constantly bemused by this belief of Leave supporters that the economic problems won't be bad when we leave"
Most of the rest of the world are bemused by this too.
As for the thorny question about immigration, any here that are not related to the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Frisians, Danes, or Romans please stand up.
BB as for our war-time bulldog spirit if it wasn't for the polish pilots we may not have won the battle of Britain.
6,066,238 signatures
-
On the issue of the economic impact, the Resolution Foundation produced a summary in February which assesses the effects since Ref1;
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/counting-the-cost/
Click through to the pdf if you want the detail.
Now people are entitled to disagree, but it would be helpful to explain why you think this to be incorrect if that is your conclusion.
-
TRB
God knows I've no axe to grind for the SNP but they voted FOR CM2.0
-
Sydney. I fully understand your policy of posting selected links in your attempt to convince others that they are wrong, but I can guarantee as a fact, not just an opinion that it is you that's wrong this time. I didn't vote to leave, I voted to remain. The fact that I believe in democracy and accept a democratic vote, whereas you obviously don't, is the main gist of why I think your opinions are fundamentally flawed.
Did you see Question Time tonight?
No I missed QT. I understand that you voted to stay but everyone understands that the leave vote was a narrow victory in a fairly low turn-out (no compulsory voting = low turn-out)
The main point of contention of those that voted to remain in Europe, apart from the majority of experts in many fields telling us we would be better off in, and the huge positive for all that there has been no war within the EU and it's unlikely that an outside country would want to take that option because we consist of 28 United countries is that ........ (deep breath) ................. there has been a concerted effort to poison the well, to stir up trouble within the UK to get people to vote leave, This is an undeniable fact and most reasonable people would/could see that it played a large part in getting the No vote up.
Do you agree with this or not?
If you do agree then the next step logical would be to support those that want the country to have a legitimate vote where everyone fully understands what they are voting for and what is at stake.
If you don't agree it would be good for you to explain to me and the forum, (not that you have to of course as I stated in an earlier post most leavers faced with direct questions ignore them or change the subject) in common sense terms why not. This is an open question to anyone on the forum leave or not.
PS: I put up posts relevant to the subject in hand mostly on topic from credible sources and yes helpful in supporting my arguments. I don't really have time to read partisan articles from sources that have a history of being bias, inaccurate, just plain wrong or have engaged in illegal activities. Why would anyone want to read them anyway?
BB, just in case you missed it I replied to your post yesterday.
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
I have a wide group of friends who vote tories and labour and the majority say they will vote if a second referendum but will never vote in a general election again, they might not keep to that but it seems many people feel the same
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
I have a wide group of friends who vote tories and labour and the majority say they will vote if a second referendum but will never vote in a general election again, they might not keep to that but it seems many people feel the same
It's very sad when it comes to this point BP, but it's a bit cutting your nose off ......... but it is those that voted in a tribal fashion that got us to this point, rewarding the tories for splitting the country with a second term!!!
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
I have a wide group of friends who vote tories and labour and the majority say they will vote if a second referendum but will never vote in a general election again, they might not keep to that but it seems many people feel the same
Well, if they get a government after an election they don't vote in that f*cks them over they'll have no right to complain about it will they?
-
''Prominent Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg suggested the UK should retaliate to any long extension by using its continued membership to block moves towards closer EU integration.
“If a long extension leaves us stuck in the EU we should be as difficult as possible,” he said.
Nigel Evans, executive secretary of the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers, warned against taking part in European elections, telling the Daily Telegraph: “This is an existential threat to the Conservative Party. We have all seen the cut-up membership cards on social media''
“No-one will believe anything said in a manifesto we put out.”
Former minister Mark Francois told the BBC that Mrs May was “consorting with the enemy” by talking to Labour in the first place.
“Many Tory MPs are absolutely furious and a lot of them are writing to (1922 Committee chairman) Graham Brady saying she’s got to go.”
It's all about them and their party if we don't get what we want which is to be able to blame someone else we're not playing and will spoil it for everyone.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-06/mays-hopes-of-brexit-compromise-deal-with-labour-hit-the-rocks/
6,066,477 signatures
-
''Prominent Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg suggested the UK should retaliate to any long extension by using its continued membership to block moves towards closer EU integration.
“If a long extension leaves us stuck in the EU we should be as difficult as possible,” he said.
I thought one of the central planks of Leavers wanting us out of the EU was because we didn't have the power to block things we don't want...but now suddenly we do have the power to block things we don't want!
-
TRB
God knows I've no axe to grind for the SNP but they voted FOR CM2.0
I stand corrected. Anyway, shit will get real next week when the French veto our request for another extension. At least it will concentrate minds. No Deal or Revoke.
-
TRB
God knows I've no axe to grind for the SNP but they voted FOR CM2.0
I stand corrected. Anyway, shit will get real next week when the French veto our request for another extension. At least it will concentrate minds. No Deal or Revoke.
It’s going to be no deal, the PM wanted to compromise without changing anything, not sure how that works? And the French have aleays hated us
-
TRB
God knows I've no axe to grind for the SNP but they voted FOR CM2.0
I stand corrected. Anyway, shit will get real next week when the French veto our request for another extension. At least it will concentrate minds. No Deal or Revoke.
Its unlikely but you never know.
So the talks came to nothing and may just keeps asking for extensions without changing anything. When you think of it like that you can see the EU getting frustrated.
-
TRB
God knows I've no axe to grind for the SNP but they voted FOR CM2.0
I stand corrected. Anyway, shit will get real next week when the French veto our request for another extension. At least it will concentrate minds. No Deal or Revoke.
It’s going to be no deal, the PM wanted to compromise without changing anything, not sure how that works? And the French have aleays hated us
Didn’t parliament vote last week to take the possibility of no deal off the table.?
-
Sydney, I didn't reply to your post yesterday because I'm among the majority of people who have a life away from reading the views of third division off-topic football forum's Brexit experts.
You talk about the concerted efforts to get people to vote leave but fail to mention the BBC remain bias and the government sent leaflets to every household warning them to vote remain, along with the scaremongering and lies of the Prime minister of the time and his side-kick. That played a large part in getting people to vote remain. It certainly did me.
Now then, on the subject of ignoring questions and changing the subject, where's the answer to my question regarding the silly poll you keep updating on? How many people told them to f**k off?
Everyone knows that no one knows what the outcome will be, except for those who think they know.
-
If it comes down to it, Parliament will vote to revoke rather than allowing no deal. That will be the end of both main parties, so as the old saying goes, "it's an ill wind..."
-
Steve, if we are poore as a country prescribed drugs will be hit.
If you believe the doom and gloom merchants on here Idler, but I don't. Come on mate, you're a similar age to me. When we were kids, we were on rations, but we got by.
This country went through 2 World Wars, and still managed to put food on the table. Does anybody honestly think we're all going to starve because of a bunch of w*nkers each side of the Channel?
Thing is, we had a united 'British Bulldog' attitude back then. Nowadays, we have a 'Britain Surrendering Together' element among us.
If we were all united in BB virtues instead of the BST element we'd have frightened the shit out of the EU.
Spot on!
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
I have a wide group of friends who vote tories and labour and the majority say they will vote if a second referendum but will never vote in a general election again, they might not keep to that but it seems many people feel the same
Well, if they get a government after an election they don't vote in that f*cks them over they'll have no right to complain about it will they?
what about if they voted for something and won then didn’t get what they voted for?
-
TRB
Plot spoiler. They won't.
-
Whether you're a Remainer or Leaver, I hope none of you will ever again vote for any member of this appalling Parliament. They are the most venal, corrupt bunch of politicians we have ever had to suffer. I'm not being partisan - for me the ERG are as bad as the likes of Soubry and Grieve who stood for election on a pledge to honour the referendum results, and have then spent every waking hour trying to overturn it.
Personally I favour something along the lines of Common Market 2.0. I'm relaxed about being in the Single Market and a Customs Union. So long as we're out of the "political" EU we can't be forced into the Euro or an EU Army. So I'm a Soft Brexit man, but I think the behaviour of MPs, with their posturing and grandstanding has been appalling.
The crowning thing for me was that the appalling Cooper Bill was passed by the vote of an MP who has just been released from prison for Perverting the course of justice, and is wearing an electronic tag. This is a Parliament of crooks. I'd love to put them all behind bars.
I have a wide group of friends who vote tories and labour and the majority say they will vote if a second referendum but will never vote in a general election again, they might not keep to that but it seems many people feel the same
Well, if they get a government after an election they don't vote in that f*cks them over they'll have no right to complain about it will they?
what about if they voted for something and won then didn’t get what they voted for?
That might depend on whether their vote was only advisory and not binding.
-
Bpool
As I keep on saying. In 2016, you didn't vote for a THING. You voted for a blanket term that covered a multitude of things.
So, you question should be, what if they voted for someTHINGS and didn't get the specific thing they thought they were voting for?
-
TRB
Plot spoiler. They won't.
You mean the extension? I think the "flextension" that Donald Tusk proposed is the best we can hope for.
I hope they won't go for the end of June, which May wants. That just smacks of can-kicking.
-
Sydney, I didn't reply to your post yesterday because I'm among the majority of people who have a life away from reading the views of third division off-topic football forum's Brexit experts.
You talk about the concerted efforts to get people to vote leave but fail to mention the BBC remain bias and the government sent leaflets to every household warning them to vote remain, along with the scaremongering and lies of the Prime minister of the time and his side-kick. That played a large part in getting people to vote remain. It certainly did me.
Now then, on the subject of ignoring questions and changing the subject, where's the answer to my question regarding the silly poll you keep updating on? How many people told them to f**k off?
Everyone knows that no one knows what the outcome will be, except for those who think they know.
We all know this is another reply avoiding the question, as for the leaflets, are they dishonest? and the BBC bias please post some links to show us what you mean.
As for your for other life you seem to still spend time spend here and still never seem to answer a direct question, same as Theresa May really.
-
Us? Who's Us? The BST Party?
-
Us? Who's Us? The BST Party?
Here again bb, answer any questions?
A shambles on which the sun never sets: how the world sees Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/06/a-shambles-on-which-the-sun-never-sets-h
6,067,049 signatures
-
Siderney, I have answered every question put to me in this thread. The answer to some of them has been "I don't know" because unlike you I don't pretend to know all the answers to everything. If you can't be arsed to find them I can't be arsed to repeat them.
The leaflets expressed the thoughts of Cameron and Osborne, who misled us about an instant recession, mass unemployment, pension reductions and punishment budgets. Cameron also lied about leading the country whatever the result of the referendum only to resign the next day. The leaflets cost more than 9 million quid of taxpayers money. More than half of voters who were against its content had to fund it!
Now then, on the subject of avoiding answering questions, perhaps you can at last answer mine.
1) who's 'we' and 'us',
2) How many people when asked to vote in the silly poll you keep updating told them to f**k off?
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1114516511702564864
Jesus, f**king, wept.
"We didn't realise Brexit was going to be rather complicated."
This from a Govt whose ministers have said they didn't realise how important Dover-Calais was to our trade, and they didn't realise that there were a lot of sectarian problems in Northern Ireland.
Good to know we're being governed by the brightest and best, eh?
-
Siderney, I have answered every question put to me in this thread. The answer to some of them has been "I don't know" because unlike you I don't pretend to know all the answers to everything. If you can't be arsed to find them I can't be arsed to repeat them.
The leaflets expressed the thoughts of Cameron and Osborne, who misled us about an instant recession, mass unemployment, pension reductions and punishment budgets. Cameron also lied about leading the country whatever the result of the referendum only to resign the next day. The leaflets cost more than 9 million quid of taxpayers money. More than half of voters who were against its content had to fund it!
Now then, on the subject of avoiding answering questions, perhaps you can at last answer mine.
1) who's 'we' and 'us',
2) How many people when asked to vote in the silly poll you keep updating told them to f**k off?
Hi Benterly, the "us and we" are everyone or almost everyone on the forum that is involved in the debate, it's not unreasonable when direct questions are asked that intelligent answers are given, no?
As for ''How many people when asked to vote in the silly poll you keep updating told them to f**k off?''
It's an on-line poll hosted by a government website so no-one actually gets asked, those that are interested go to the site and vote.
These are the questions I put to you the other day, not difficult but interesting to know where you stand on a couple of things.
The main point of contention of those that voted to remain in Europe, apart from the majority of experts in many fields telling us we would be better off in, and the huge positive for all that there has been no war within the EU and it's unlikely that an outside country would want to take that option because we consist of 28 United countries is that ........ (deep breath) ................. there has been a concerted effort to poison the well, to stir up trouble within the UK to get people to vote leave, This is an undeniable fact and most reasonable people would/could see that it played a large part in getting the No vote up.
Do you agree with this or not?
If you do agree then the next step logical would be to support those that want the country to have a legitimate vote where everyone fully understands what they are voting for and what is at stake.
If you don't agree it would be good for you to explain to me and the forum, (not that you have to of course as I stated in an earlier post most leavers faced with direct questions ignore them or change the subject) in common sense terms why not. This is an open question to anyone on the forum leave or not.
6,067,926 signatures
-
Hi Siderney. I think in a one on to one situation such as this, 'us' and 'we' are terms of weakness used by people seeking the security of back up. I personally don't use the terms. I get my strength from personal opinion. Perhaps that's why I don't always feel the need to show links to strengthen my case.
Regarding your question that I've answered over and over again, no, I don't agree with it. It fails to mention for instance the one-sided government propaganda leaflet which proved to be written by liars and forced on everybody.
Regarding your 'next step logic', no, I don't agree with it. I believe in democracy and that means democratic votes should stand. Maybe there shouldn't have been a vote in the first place, but there was and It wasn't the result of the vote at fault, it was the way it has been handled by people in power taking undemocratic liberties in attempts to make it fail. The real sad bit is over 6 million of the public agree there should be a revote. Not a vast amount for another one-sided propaganda poll that only records positive response, but it does signify 6+ million misguided people.
-
BB surely the leave side could organise a petition if they wished to show that there are millions that still want to leave.
I voted leave but expected a negotiation process that would keep us trading with our nearest neighbours not the bitter farce that has unfolded.
-
Hi Siderney. I think in a one on to one situation such as this, 'us' and 'we' are terms of weakness used by people seeking the security of back up. I personally don't use the terms. I get my strength from personal opinion. Perhaps that's why I don't always feel the need to show links to strengthen my case.
Regarding your question that I've answered over and over again, no, I don't agree with it. It fails to mention for instance the one-sided government propaganda leaflet which proved to be written by liars and forced on everybody.
Regarding your 'next step logic', no, I don't agree with it. I believe in democracy and that means democratic votes should stand. Maybe there shouldn't have been a vote in the first place, but there was and It wasn't the result of the vote at fault, it was the way it has been handled by people in power taking undemocratic liberties in attempts to make it fail. The real sad bit is over 6 million of the public agree there should be a revote. Not a vast amount for another one-sided propaganda poll that only records positive response, but it does signify 6+ million misguided people.
I never think posting on an open forum is a strictly 1-1 situation, I think that's why it's called a forum rather than email.
You are entitled to use whatever terms you wish and so is everyone else, I think you are somehow using this as support for your own thinking and do no agree.
Which parts of the ''leaflet'' do you disagree with and why or are you parroting what someone else has said?
If the leaflet was lies as you say plus all the illegal foreign money on fb does that not strengthen the case for a second vote? it means most of the people that voted were lied to.
You say that ''but there was and It wasn't the result of the vote at fault, it was the way it has been handled by people in power taking undemocratic liberties in attempts to make it fail'' it is not clear what you mean here could explain?
6m + wanting to revoke A50 not one of them told anyone to f**k-off.
Your argument here and other comments about bulldog spirit or similar appear to be a mishmash of built up resentment which is difficult to fathom.
regards Syderney
6,068,173 signatures
-
"Parroting what someone else has said"? Apologies if you are joking there, but aren't YOU the one that posts link after link after link after link after link in order to parrot what someone else has said?
You just clutch at straws. You talk about the illegal foreign money forcing people to vote leave, and before that story came out you raged about some other story you could jump on the bandwagon of.
It reminds me of Ricky Gervais's Office episode of the annual quiz competition.
If you don't know what I mean, watch it.
-
"Parroting what someone else has said"? Apologies if you are joking there, but aren't YOU the one that posts link after link after link after link after link in order to parrot what someone else has said?
You just clutch at straws. You talk about the illegal foreign money forcing people to vote leave, and before that story came out you raged about some other story you could jump on the bandwagon of.
It reminds me of Ricky Gervais's Office episode of the annual quiz competition.
If you don't know what I mean, watch it.
Reread this last post of yours and then you'll understand why I think you're frustrated and have built up resentment for what reasons I'm unsure but may be that you are having difficulty in expressing yourself. Remaining calm is always best, in my opinion.
Thank you for your prompt reply, Syderney
6,068,225 signatures and climbing.
-
TRB
Plot spoiler. They won't.
You mean the extension? I think the "flextension" that Donald Tusk proposed is the best we can hope for.
I hope they won't go for the end of June, which May wants. That just smacks of can-kicking.
I meant that neither the French nor anyone else will veto it.
-
Syderney, your perception of my disposition is about as good as your concept of one-sided propaganda polls that only count positive responses.
-
Worth 11 mins of your time if you're genuinely interested in how our democracy is being stolen.
https://www.zdf.de/politik/frontal-21/drahtzieher-des-brexits-english-version-100.html
And listen to Farage's response. "No-one is interested."
This is how it happens folks. It happens because ordinary people are too bored to do anything about it.
-
It looks like even Peter Oborne has changed his mind. (Perhaps someone should tell Liz Truss that it does happen!)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-was-strong-brexiteer-now-we-must-swallow-our-pride-and-think-again/
-
I've said for years that, although I'm at the other end of the political spectrum, I have nothing but respect for Peter Oborne's approach to each and every problem he deals with. I often come to a different conclusion to him, but he starts from the position of establishing facts and concepts, and draws his conclusions from those. He doesn't decide what he believes then sticks his head between his legs, refusing to engage with difficult contrary facts.
So it's eye opening to read that from him. He's been an ardent and strident Brexiteer for many years. But he's enough of a grown up to see that it's time to look at the absolute shambles that this has led us into.
And THIS, is the most sensible and thoughtful response I've yet seen to the "it's all about the principle" childish b*llocks that gets trotted out with depressing regularity.
I respect those who say yes, all this is worth it to pursue a dream of independence. It is a noble dream. I share it. It is founded on Britain’s historic role as a proud nation that has repeatedly fought for freedom and liberty. I, too, am conscious of our magnificent history. In the 18th century we stood against the Bourbon dream of European hegemony. We liberated Europe from the Napoleonic domination of continental Europe at the start of the 19th century. And faced up to Nazi Germany in 1940.
But this is not 1939 or the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. History gets made and remade all the time. The European Union is not a dictatorship, as contemptuous of national identity as Napoleonic France. Nor can it be compared to Nazi Germany – a foolish analogy which has become an ugly cliché and displays an unforgivable failure to understand the true horror of recent European history. Nor is it any longer a socialist project as envisaged by Jacques Delors, let alone an evil empire, as some have characterised it.
Of course our looming privations and national isolation would be thoroughly worthwhile if we were confronting such a continental menace. Let others call us ridiculous: we would have a duty to stand alone. But is such language appropriate in a century when all our EU partners are democracies, and none poses the remotest threat of taking up arms against us?
-
This is good int it?
https://mobile.twitter.com/theresa_may/status/1114891046025084931?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-4271620539573117560.ampproject.net%2F1903281741200%2Fframe.html
As we enter the most politically fraught week since Suez, May has been off down the market, listen to folk shouting, "Oi! Treezah! Wot's 'appenin' wi' that there Brexit then, eh?"
Then making shite selfie videos.
-
Glyn, lots have changed their minds,I would vote out if there was ever a sell out and another vote.
I know quite a few more people who would do the same.
-
Syderney, your perception of my disposition is about as good as your concept of one-sided propaganda polls that only count positive responses.
Disposition dat position, apart from being annoyed at Cameron as many of us are with those from the Bellenden club, forget the past few votes and the next one for a moment, forget all the division and argument, tell me in simple term for yes I'm a simple man what is it you want from Brexit give me a vision from the "man in the street'' what are you hoping to get from a "win" Mr Benterley.
6,069,258 signatures (60 times more than required for a parliamentary debate)
-
In simple terms, I hope what we democratically voted for turns out to be a good decision and the country eventually flourishes.
What do you hope for Syderney?
-
In simple terms, I hope what we democratically voted for turns out to be a good decision and the country eventually flourishes.
What do you hope for Syderney?
I did hope that for once you would give an answer that actually meant something rather than flowery terms that don't tell me or anyone else anything.
I hope that the country pulls back from the precipice and that regional Britain would continue to receive EU funding, more than it ever did from London-centric government.
6,069,319 signatures more than brexitcon
-
It’s really simple..
The electorate voted to leave mainly, I believe, in principle rather than in practical terms..
Now almost 3 years later we find that leaving us actually impractical, on principle or not.
Therefore the situation is far different now than it was the day before referendum.
And I think I am repeating myself too, but how is it undemocratic to have another vote, whereas it is seen as perfectly democratic for parliament to vote several times on the same thing.?
-
It’s really simple..
The electorate voted to leave mainly, I believe, in principle rather than in practical terms..
Now almost 3 years later we find that leaving us actually impractical, on principle or not.
Therefore the situation is far different now than it was the day before referendum.
And I think I am repeating myself too, but how is it undemocratic to have another vote, whereas it is seen as perfectly democratic for parliament to vote several times on the same thing.?
Democracy is optional depending whether you want to support a position of a corrupt vote on not, apparently.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
If you have a look at the map it is fairly clear that those not voting to revoke A50 are from areas that were once the industrial areas of Britain where you had a job for life and you knew what the future held for you more or less (usually less) it's these areas that are suffering from a lack of investment and lack of interest from their own government over the years and it's not surprising that this neglect has led to resentment and a protest vote against the government, less than 3 in 100 have voted in Doncaster North, Hodge Hill in the Black Country has only just over 2 in 100 voting, whereas in areas of affluence the vote can get up to around 27%. I won't try and analise the map further as the information is not there but it paints a story of a divided Britain and if one thing is clear is that if you want to lock-in for perpetuity this unfair division of the nations spoils then Brexit is the way to do it.
6,069,375 signatures
-
Revoking a public democratic vote before it has been carried and then replacing it with another vote in the name of democracy will set a precedent for future sore losers to demand revotes.
Leaving is proving to be impractical because of the way it has been handled by people in power taking undemocratic liberties in attempts to make it fail, and there could be repercussions of greater proportions than many of us think if we have a revote.
-
Let's just say we have another vote, same question. The big holding point for many is that remain would win, which it may well. But if it didn't what would those who call for it so much want to happen then? This is something I have not seen anyone discuss.....
On the same token as someone who favoured leave last time around, if I were to vote remain in another referendum there would for me have to be some change, not just remain as we are. Cameron was some of the way there last time around but there needs to be a little bit more (and by saying that in a negotiation we should give something to the EU in return for something back it cannot be a one way street).
-
BB, the longer the issue remains open the less and less the “sore loser” argument holds water.. sure, just following the referendum that could be said, but almost 3 years later and possibly even longer, the background situation is surely different to when the first vote happened.?
BYFP, for a second referendum surely this time the vote would actually have some definition of what leaving would mean ie agree with parliament and the EU - therefore if leave were to win again but on a much more defined outcome, then many more remainers IMHO would accept with good grace or even vote leave as well..
-
BYFP, for a second referendum surely this time the vote would actually have some definition of what leaving would mean ie agree with parliament and the EU - therefore if leave were to win again but on a much more defined outcome, then many more remainers IMHO would accept with good grace or even vote leave as well..
I take your point and don't disagree that should be the case. Nearly 3 years on and we still don't actually know what it means nor are we much further on, the point only works if politicians can get their bloody act together (by that I mean the government/tories mainly, most parties are fairly clear right now just the bloody Tories that can't be consistent).
-
IDM, of course, this referendum is different from usual electoral votes because of the time it is taking to implement. Usual electoral votes are carried out instantly. Imagine if it took 3 years for a new election winning party to take actually take over? What sort of scandal stories would appear in the media, not least by sore losers?
People in this thread talk about 'grown-up' politics, but some people use that term as a disguise for what is basically them being sore losers.
-
Revoking a public democratic vote before it has been carried and then replacing it with another vote in the name of democracy will set a precedent for future sore losers to demand revotes.
Leaving is proving to be impractical because of the way it has been handled by people in power taking undemocratic liberties in attempts to make it fail, and there could be repercussions of greater proportions than many of us think if we have a revote.
Maybe bb if we didn't have the most incompetent, selfish government on the planet maybe they could have understood the stupidity and impossibility of the vote along with the result and then admitted what was proposed was never going to happen, take this message to the people and then way back then attempt to resolve it in a bi-partisan way. Now it appears the only thing this government is interested in is self survival. Who in their right or any other mind would vote for this crew ever again.
-
I'm genuinely fascinated by these folk who are horrified about the threat to our democracy that having a vote would entail. But couldn't give two shits about criminal activity, Kremlin money and targeted lies fed silently into people's social media, where they couldn't be challenged.
Strange priorities...
-
SR. Now is probably the best chance ever for this government to win another term. The best endorsement they can give themselves is to send a poster to every household with a picture of Corbyn and Abbott on it.
-
SR. Now is probably the best chance ever for this government to win another term. The best endorsement they can give themselves is to send a poster to every household with a picture of Corbyn and Abbott on it.
Are you telling me you would vote for a party with Johnson, Mogg, May, Fox .............................. etc, a party that has aligned itself with the UDP, has cost Britain 180 billion, imposed Austerity on the masses while reducing taxes for the rich, sold off the Royal Mail and allowed selected buyers to make windfalll profits, has perpetuated racist programs again British subjects ............
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Sounds like there mat be a bit of jealousy there bb
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Thankfully it isn't a choice neither major party would deally get my vote right now but then I'm struggling to think who would.
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Thankfully it isn't a choice neither major party would deally get my vote right now but then I'm struggling to think who would.
Exactly
-
It looks like Hunt is trying to open the negotiations to some real options, if he doesn't be careful they'll make him the next PM.
Hunt implies government open to customs union compromise, saying 'big red lines' should not apply in talks with Labour
At the weekend Philip Hammond, the chancellor, said that there were “no red lines” for the government in its talks with Labour aimed at finding a Brexit compromise. This morning, in a doorstep on his arrival at the EU foreign affairs council, Jeremy Hunt, the foreign secretary, said more or less exactly the same thing. In normal circumstances cabinet ministers adopting the same line would not count as news. But cabinet discipline is now so threadbare that it starts to become interesting. For Hammond, perhaps the cabinet’s leading pro-European, to say “no red lines”, implying he is open to a customs union, is not a surprise. But for Hunt, a remain-voter who is now reinventing himself as a Brexiter, to say the same thing is a bit more noteworthy.
looks like they are preparing the ground to let down the hard brexiters gently, if they decide to stay in the customs union and a few other odds and ends will you demand another vote bb
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Sounds like there mat be a bit of jealousy there bb
Siderney, carry on being a bit of a prat and I'll stop wasting my time responding to you.
-
And THIS is why intelligent people like Peter Oborne are re-thi king their support for Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47652280
What sensible country would CHOOSE to put itself through that?
f**king insanity, brought on by juvenile obsessions with the EU as some sort of existential threat.
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Sounds like there mat be a bit of jealousy there bb
Siderney, carry on being a bit of a prat and I'll stop wasting my time responding to you.
As you wish bb, you're not exactly renowned for giving straight answers, but for every person that makes mistakes in non-government parties there are, remind me how many ministers that have resigned and or made fools of themselves which is the only possible reason Grayling still has a job. As for JC I probably would not vote for him and he would probably have to be replaced unless he supports a confirmatory parliamentary vote on whatever is decided.
-
I think I have voted in the general elections probably only twice, ever. Once because it was the first time I could, after turning 18, and possibly last time.. I have little faith in any of the main parties to be honest, and I struggle to choose who to vote for.
As long as voting isn’t mandatory, choosing not to vote doesn’t mean I can’t then comment on the failings of government.
Many non-voters will choose that way as a protest, and the parties should be appealing to win those votes..
Even so, we get another choice every 5 years maximum..
-
I can’t see the story any longer but I am sure I read on the BBC website over the weekend that the PM said it could be a “stark choice” between (her) deal and no brexit..
Isn’t that what we should have had in the referendum.?
-
I think I have voted in the general elections probably only twice, ever. Once because it was the first time I could, after turning 18, and possibly last time.. I have little faith in any of the main parties to be honest, and I struggle to choose who to vote for.
As long as voting isn’t mandatory, choosing not to vote doesn’t mean I can’t then comment on the failings of government.
Many non-voters will choose that way as a protest, and the parties should be appealing to win those votes..
Even so, we get another choice every 5 years maximum..
Unfortunately only those that you tell that you are protesting and why will know, the very politicians you are protesting against will not have a clue. Your non-vote may be put down to a whole series of reasons non of which may be accurate.
-
But the parties should be looking at why people don’t vote.. there’s a vast amount of votes out there not being used which could make a huge difference..
-
If you look at the recent By-election in Wales only 37% bothered to vote, although labour retained the seat their majority fell by 3,000 from about 5.000 to just under 2,000. Corbyn declares this a victory based on spending cuts. If the same swing happens at the next election he can say bye, bye to this seat. Who will he blame then?
-
I reckon some people won't vote in protest at the desire for some to have the Brexit vote revoked.
I see rivers of blank ballot papers.
-
Watched a cracking film yesterday, 'San Demetrio London'. Proper guts and spirit those lads had. Good job this true story wasn't today because this generation would have given up because it was to hard.
-
Watched a cracking film yesterday, 'San Demetrio London'. Proper guts and spirit those lads had. Good job this true story wasn't today because this generation would have given up because it was to hard.
Is today's Merchant Navy really that bad?
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
-
Nobody has signed up to No Deal either.
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
Well you've reached an interesting cross-roads there because it was Winston Churchill himself who was one of the first to propose a 'United States of Europe'.
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
Well you've reached an interesting cross-roads there because it was Winston Churchill himself who was one of the first to propose a 'United States of Europe'.
Well he got that one wrong then didn't he, or is that the route you would like to go in?
-
Now I'm no historian and might be way out here but following WW1 didn't Churchill say "a "European Union" was possible between continental states, but without Britain's involvement:
We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality. But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed".
-
Now I'm no historian and might be way out here but following WW1 didn't Churchill say "a "European Union" was possible between continental states, but without Britain's involvement:
We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality. But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed".
That sounds very sensible to me.
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
Well you've reached an interesting cross-roads there because it was Winston Churchill himself who was one of the first to propose a 'United States of Europe'.
Well he got that one wrong then didn't he, or is that the route you would like to go in?
You brought it up. What do have against the idea?
-
'I wish to speak about the tragedy of Europe, this noble continent, the home of all the great parent races of the Western world, the foundation of Christian faith and ethics, the origin of most of the culture, arts, philosophy and science both of ancient and modern times. If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance there would be no limit to the happiness, prosperity and glory which its 300 million or 400 million people would enjoy.'
'We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple. All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong and to gain as their reward blessing instead of cursing.'
'Is the only lesson of history to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there be justice, mercy and freedom. The peoples have only to will it and all will achieve their heart’s desire.'
'There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe will be such as to make the material strength of a single State less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by a contribution to the common cause. '
'we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe, and the first practical step will be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join a union we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and every land from war and servitude must be established on solid foundations, and must be created by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than to submit to tyranny.'
Extracts from Churchill's 'United States of Europe' speech given at Zurich University in 1946. The full speech (worth reading) is here:
https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/united-states-of-europe/
-
Now I'm no historian and might be way out here but following WW1 didn't Churchill say "a "European Union" was possible between continental states, but without Britain's involvement:
We see nothing but good and hope in a richer, freer, more contented European commonality. But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed".
That sounds very sensible to me.
Except it isn't, and he wouldn't say the same thing today because the world is very different. The empire has gone, the 'threat' of communism from the east has receded, Germany's economy isn't in ruins and smaller than ours, America doesn't care about the 'special relationship' etc. The 'compromise' he talks of is to those type of issues. But they have all been compromised already and consigned to history (unlike the opinions of some who still seem to live in the shadows of WW2).
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Sounds like there mat be a bit of jealousy there bb
Sydney, you've stopped quoting the latest score on that stupid petition. Come on man, keep up.
-
AL
Grow up.
Go and read that piece by Peter Oborne, who has had a lifetime of being anti-EU.
As he says, it's infantile to choose to tip yourself into economic catastrophe. You don't CHOOSE to do that. You do it when there's no alternative because the consequences of not doing it are even worse.
So yes, if you're faced with a Hitler or a Napoleon, you have no option but to roll up your sleeves and grit your teeth and accept the economic hardship.
But to compare the EU to threats like that and to say that the EU is such a threat that you would CHOOSE to make yourself poorer and weaker is just f**king childish idiocy.
-
Actually I am fine with a United States of Europe.
Civilization's best hope at the moment.
-
'I wish to speak about the tragedy of Europe, this noble continent, the home of all the great parent races of the Western world, the foundation of Christian faith and ethics, the origin of most of the culture, arts, philosophy and science both of ancient and modern times. If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance there would be no limit to the happiness, prosperity and glory which its 300 million or 400 million people would enjoy.'
'We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple. All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong and to gain as their reward blessing instead of cursing.'
'Is the only lesson of history to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there be justice, mercy and freedom. The peoples have only to will it and all will achieve their heart’s desire.'
'There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe will be such as to make the material strength of a single State less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by a contribution to the common cause. '
'we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe, and the first practical step will be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join a union we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and every land from war and servitude must be established on solid foundations, and must be created by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than to submit to tyranny.'
Extracts from Churchill's 'United States of Europe' speech given at Zurich University in 1946. The full speech (worth reading) is here:
https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/united-states-of-europe/
Wilts, was Churchill including Britain in that united Europe?
-
'I wish to speak about the tragedy of Europe, this noble continent, the home of all the great parent races of the Western world, the foundation of Christian faith and ethics, the origin of most of the culture, arts, philosophy and science both of ancient and modern times. If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance there would be no limit to the happiness, prosperity and glory which its 300 million or 400 million people would enjoy.'
'We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple. All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong and to gain as their reward blessing instead of cursing.'
'Is the only lesson of history to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there be justice, mercy and freedom. The peoples have only to will it and all will achieve their heart’s desire.'
'There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe will be such as to make the material strength of a single State less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by a contribution to the common cause. '
'we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe, and the first practical step will be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join a union we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and every land from war and servitude must be established on solid foundations, and must be created by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than to submit to tyranny.'
Extracts from Churchill's 'United States of Europe' speech given at Zurich University in 1946. The full speech (worth reading) is here:
https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/united-states-of-europe/
Wilts, was Churchill including Britain in that united Europe?
Well he uses the word 'we' quite a lot. What other country would Winston Churchill reference as 'we' other than Britain?
-
Wasn't he referring to 'we' as Europe?
-
Wasn't he referring to 'we' as Europe?
.. Well aye, precisely. Since we are a part of Europe...
-
Wasn't he referring to 'we' as Europe?
Well shortly after that speech he was instrumental in setting up the British United Europe Movement. In 1948 he led the British delegation to the First Congress of Europe, and was made Honorary President of the Congress. In his inaugural speech he talks about the 16 states (so clearly including Britain) and explicitly said
'The Council of Europe, including Great Britain linked with her Empire and Commonwealth..'
https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/address_given_by_winston_churchill_at_the_congress_of_europe_in_the_hague_7_may_1948-en-58118da1-af22-48c0-bc88-93cda974f42c.html
So yes I agree with you. Churchill refers to Europe as 'we' with Britain as an integral part of that 'we'. He clearly saw Britain playing a leading part in his idea of a United States of Europe.
-
https://www.ft.com/content/3d6bbabc-7122-11e6-a0c9-1365ce54b926
-
Interesting development if true.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1115343945838616576?p=v
-
Some fascinating data in the big YouGov Brexit poll published today.
This is the most depressing.
https://mobile.twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1115161142798712832
So, the people most in favour of No Deal are not necessarily wilfully refusing to engage with the economic predictions that say No Deal would be horrific. They co sider themselves personally to be economically on Easy Street and so, presumably unconcerned by the negative effects.
Grand eh? "I'm alright Jack" in spades.
-
If it was just a choice of the two I'd vote Conservative. I would never, ever vote for a party that has Diane Abbott in it. That in itself describes to me how out of touch Corbyn is so I wouldn't vote for a party with him in it either.
Sounds like there mat be a bit of jealousy there bb
Sydney, you've stopped quoting the latest score on that stupid petition. Come on man, keep up.
My apologies Steve, here you go: 6,070,698 signatures
Now did anyone bother to look at the map provided that shows how most of the poorer areas haven't voted while the more affluent areas have, showing to me at least that brexitcon was a protest vote not about pushing the self destruct button.
-
f**king Hell, that's like 0.08% of the UK! Or, if you like, the whole population of Lebanon!
-
Well, they do say the folk who currently support Brexit struggle with numbers...
-
OK smart arse about 8.95% of the UK. Still only the population of Lebanon, and still a poll only declaring positive results.
-
Just in: May wants to extend Article 50 by the projected population of Lebanon.
6,070,797 signatures, vote runs to 20/08/2019.
-
Some fascinating data in the big YouGov Brexit poll published today.
This is the most depressing.
https://mobile.twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1115161142798712832
So, the people most in favour of No Deal are not necessarily wilfully refusing to engage with the economic predictions that say No Deal would be horrific. They co sider themselves personally to be economically on Easy Street and so, presumably unconcerned by the negative effects.
Grand eh? "I'm alright Jack" in spades.
From the data:
Thread: We've done a UCL-YouGov, 5000+ UK voters – asked people to rank outcomes for Brexit. @HuffPostUK
article here (link: https://bit.ly/2UGHgtK) bit.ly/2UGHgtK
Main pts: OVERALL, No Deal is LEAST preferred outcome (despite what ERG say), but it is the MOST preferred outcome for LEAVE voters. 1/6
People who didn’t vote leave are REALLY WORRIED about the impact of No Deal on the economy. But Leave voters are not only not that worried about No Deal – they are MORE worried about leaving with the Withdrawal Agreement. 2/6
But, among Leave Voters, support for No Deal is driven by those most likely to weather any economic downturn. Financially struggling Leave voters are MUCH MORE worried… it's not the "left behind" who really want No Deal... 3/6
-
Nay worries BB. What's the odd 100 times mistake among friends?
-
Anyone for a change of heart?
''The much-mocked Project Fear Treasury forecasts are already proving correct: they warned a Brexit vote would mean households losing out by £4,300 by 2030. Households are already £1,500 worse off, and becoming poorer faster than forecast, in the worst era for growth since the 1860s, according to Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/08/britain-eu-brexit
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
Well you've reached an interesting cross-roads there because it was Winston Churchill himself who was one of the first to propose a 'United States of Europe'.
Did he really?
Well he also said. If we must choose between Europe and the open sea, we must choose the open sea. (the world)
-
AL
And THAT sums up the idiocy of quite a few Brexit supporters I've had the misfortune of interacting with.
Let's chuck ourselves into the problems and privations that you have no option but to face in a war because...Well because what? It feels like there are a lot of fragile egos around who feel themselves to be less of a man because they never had to face down an existential enemy in battle.
It's beyond stupid and beyond pathetic. Fortunately, there are far too many grown ups in the country to allow us to be tipped into this sort of juvenile fantasy land.
This is an existential threat to our nation. Do we go forward as a free nation or allow ourselves to become part of a United States of Europe which is not what we signed up for in the seventies?
Well you've reached an interesting cross-roads there because it was Winston Churchill himself who was one of the first to propose a 'United States of Europe'.
Did he really?
Well he also said. If we must choose between Europe and the open sea, we must choose the open sea. (the world)
But did he vote for Brexit?
-
It matters not, what is happening now is happening in 2019, not 1949 or 1919..
-
Nay worries BB. What's the odd 100 times mistake among friends?
I knew I shouldn't have read that Diane Abbott book of basic arithmetic I got for Christmas.
-
I think a more elegant climbdown BB would have been to accept that anyone can get a calculation wrong, and that only bores with no other point to make keep banging on about it.
-
I’m surprised she let you borrow it B.B.😳
-
I think a more elegant climbdown BB would have been to accept that anyone can get a calculation wrong, and that only bores with no other point to make keep banging on about it.
You read my mind, Billy lad. I thought you were one of those bores with no other point to make on this occasion.
-
It matters not, what is happening now is happening in 2019, not 1949 or 1919..
Agreed
-
If this is true, it is farcical in so many ways.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nicholaswatt/status/1115374648361926656
-
Here's Snoop Mogg on Twitter explicitly saying that the UK can't be trusted in a deliberate attempt to undermine the ongoing negotiations. It's almost like he's trying to force a no deal. I wonder why he'd be doing that? Sure it's nothing to do with the millions he'd stand to personally make from it.
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1115523749548363776
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1114086264024727554
Just...beyond words.
"If we end up stuck in the EU for a long time because we haven't got a f**king clue what we are doing, we should throw a strop and f**k up a whole load of EU things that aren't happening."
And then we'll get really, really, REALLY touchy when someone in the EU has the temerity to suggest that we're not approaching this in a grown up fashion.
-
MM
He's playing to the gallery of idiots who lap up this sort of juvenile crap.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1114086264024727554
Just...beyond words.
"If we end up stuck in the EU for a long time because we haven't got a f**king clue what we are doing, we should throw a strop and f**k up a whole load of EU things that aren't happening."
And then we'll get really, really, REALLY touchy when someone in the EU has the temerity to suggest that we're not approaching this in a grown up fashion.
That's your normal democratic right within the institutions of the EU. He's making a case to stay in.
-
Copps
That can't be right. I thought we had no say in Europe and we were told what to do by a fascist (or is it socialist? I forget now) superstate?
-
God almighty.
Listen to this woman "debating" with Peter Oborne.
https://www.channel4.com/news/why-i-changed-my-mind-on-leaving-eu-peter-oborne-debates-with-melissa-kite-on-brexit
"Not a single one of the 17.4m have changed their minds."
She's stood next to one who has! When that's pointed out to her, she hints that she doesn't believe Oborne was ever in favour of Brexit. So she's clearly never seen or read him before because he was a fire-in-the-belly anti-EU tub-thumper previously.
Try 4:15 and 6:00 here.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DPK9BV4oG0ho&ved=2ahUKEwimpKjB2cLhAhWDr3EKHfYoBm0QwqsBMAJ6BAgHEBA&usg=AOvVaw27nN4KY7RH8r4tyrTUr80p
And then she repeats several times that the polls are moving towards Brexit and not a single one of the 17.4m have changed their minds.
Well, aside from the probability that something pushing a million of those who voted Leave in 2016 are already dead, here's what the polls say.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/
Take your pick. Do you analyse facts and events and draw your conclusions from them?
Or do you choose what you want to believe and invent "facts" to support that belief?
-
The irony is its more of a democracy than we all appreciate.
I was mildly taken at one point by the argument that certain institutions within the EU aren't particularly democratic, mainly certain parts of the commission and council of ministers. But you have to square that with the fact that it was Farage's oratory within the Parliament that got us into this position. His speeches on Greece, Lisbon Treaty, the UK leaving were watched by millions online before the referendum.
Then you hear that these new right-wing nationalist movements in Italy and elsewhere are strategising to fight nationalist campaigns within in the EU. So it leaves some serious questions about the functioning of national democracies. I am staggered that at this time anyone in their right mind would actively want to give more control and power to our national parliament.
-
Copps
But the Rees-Mogg/Farage project is NOT to give more power to the Legislature. It's to give more power to the Executive, whilst simultaneously staging a coup in the Tory party to put someone at the extreme Right of British politics in charge of the Executive.
That is what it has always been about. Brexit is a step on the path, not the destination.
-
I cannot comprehend why anyone would want to give up being a free nation and be absorbed by a monster state where our voice would be ignored. I'm sorry but I just can't get my head around such a thing.
I would rather be cut off like North Korea than become part of a US of E. even if it meant living in a garden shed.
-
Copps
That can't be right. I thought we had no say in Europe and we were told what to do by a fascist (or is it socialist? I forget now) superstate?
I'd read up on what socialism and fascism mean. They are inextricably linked.
-
I know you think you're 'trolling' Axholme Lion, but a serious question for you to ponder when you're lying in bed at night is whether the elite - those like Jacob Rees Mogg and his global hedge fund - really want that scenario to happen. And if not, what does that mean for you?
-
BS. You advising me to read up is the best laugh I've had in what's looking like a very depressing week.
As it happens, I'm currently reading "The Origins of Totalitarianism" by Hannah Arendt. Fascinating central theme that democracy becomes endangered when there is an alliance between what she calls "The Elite and the Mob". Jacob Ress-Mogg and Tommy Robinson for example. (It was ever thus of course. The Roman Republic was undermined and eventually destroyed by elites who used the plebs as their muscle. And over the pond, billionaires are telling rednecks that they, together, can MAGA.)
Anyway, back to Hannah Arendt. This quote, based on her experience of living through the horrors of the 1930s is as vitally important today as it was back then.
"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist."
In other words, if you want to subvert democracy, the first thing you do is destroy the concept of objective truth in people's heads. Then you can fill it with your own "truth".
Trump is the poster boy for that of course. He's ideal, not because he's an ideologue deliberately pursuing a strategic plan, but because he lies as easily (and more regularly) than he shits. But there are a lot of politicians around tese days who are systematically undermining the concept of objective truth. They lie and lie and lie, then say "well EVERYONE lies. Believe what you want."
The biggest battle today is not about Leave or Remain. It's not even about Right and Left. It's about the concept of objective truth. It's about the ability to determine who is being truthful and who is leading you by the nose for their own ends. Lose that battle, as Hannah Arendt well knew, and you are heading into a very dark place.
That's one reason why I respect Peter Oborne and despise Nigel Farage, even though they are not that far apart in their political views. One prizes truth and honesty above everything. The other would lie to you about the time of day if it helped him achieve what he wants.
-
So Billy, is the answer to everything simply believing everything that you believe?
-
I know you think you're 'trolling' Axholme Lion, but a serious question for you to ponder when you're lying in bed at night is whether the elite - those like Jacob Rees Mogg and his global hedge fund - really want that scenario to happen. And if not, what does that mean for you?
What scenario to happen?
-
You remember, the one where you said you'd rather be cut off like North Korea and/or living in a garden shed.
-
No BB. Why on earth would you read that into what I said?
The answer is to look at the track records of people telling you things. To look around and see whether there is independent evidence to support what they say.
Simple example.
Back in 2016, Trump said he'd love to release his tax returns but he couldn't as they were under audit. He said he'd release them when the audit had finished.
The tax office said that there was no reason whatsoever why they couldn't be released while under audit.
Trump's lawyer said this weekend that Trump will never release his tax returns.
With that information at your disposal, do you think Trump was being honest and truthful when he gave his reason for not releasing his returns and said he would love to do so in 2016?
Or, if that one's too rich for your taste, how about Trump claiming that Mueller's report "totally exonerated" him, when a direct line from the report specifically said he was not exonerated?
Or, back at home, what about Farage insisting in very aggressive terms in 2012 that he had nothing to do with the batshit 2010 UKIP manifesto (which demanded among other things, that taxi drivers wear uniforms and trains be painted in traditional livery colours) when he had written and signed off the Executive Summary and launched the document at a press conference.
In general terms, if someone insists A is true, but there is documentary evidence to say that A is false, would you, as an intelligent person, trust that person the next time they told you something? Or would you work on the assumption that if they have a track record of lying, you'd be better served not believing them in future without good evidence?
If you were stood at a window with someone and it was clearly raining outside but they insisted it wasn't, would you trust them the next time they told you what the weather was?
-
BST, a lot depends on believing what you want to believe in the first place. People's track records can be portrayed differently depending on who's publishing them. Some publishers with an agenda will exploit any negativity they can against a person in order to support their own views, and people who share those views will read it and believe it.
It seems to me that people find it easier to incriminate the opposition instead of explaining the merits of their own beliefs. It's not that much different to juvenile football fans singing about how shit the opposition is instead of actually praising their own team.
It's no different on this forum than in the real world. If I believed everything you Billy, for instance, posted, all the people who you support would be squeaky clean and all who you oppose would be f**king liars, or not grown up, or racist or whatever.
-
No BB. Why on earth would you read that into what I said?
The answer is to look at the track records of people telling you things. To look around and see whether there is independent evidence to support what they say.
Simple example.
Back in 2016, Trump said he'd love to release his tax returns but he couldn't as they were under audit. He said he'd release them when the audit had finished.
The tax office said that there was no reason whatsoever why they couldn't be released while under audit.
Trump's lawyer said this weekend that Trump will never release his tax returns.
With that information at your disposal, do you think Trump was being honest and truthful when he gave his reason for not releasing his returns and said he would love to do so in 2016?
Or, if that one's too rich for your taste, how about Trump claiming that Mueller's report "totally exonerated" him, when a direct line from the report specifically said he was not exonerated?
Or, back at home, what about Farage insisting in very aggressive terms in 2012 that he had nothing to do with the batshit 2010 UKIP manifesto (which demanded among other things, that taxi drivers wear uniforms and trains be painted in traditional livery colours) when he had written and signed off the Executive Summary and launched the document at a press conference.
In general terms, if someone insists A is true, but there is documentary evidence to say that A is false, would you, as an intelligent person, trust that person the next time they told you something? Or would you work on the assumption that if they have a track record of lying, you'd be better served not believing them in future without good evidence?
If you were stood at a window with someone and it was clearly raining outside but they insisted it wasn't, would you trust them the next time they told you what the weather was?
BS. You advising me to read up is the best laugh I've had in what's looking like a very depressing week.
As it happens, I'm currently reading "The Origins of Totalitarianism" by Hannah Arendt. Fascinating central theme that democracy becomes endangered when there is an alliance between what she calls "The Elite and the Mob". Jacob Ress-Mogg and Tommy Robinson for example. (It was ever thus of course. The Roman Republic was undermined and eventually destroyed by elites who used the plebs as their muscle. And over the pond, billionaires are telling rednecks that they, together, can MAGA.)
Anyway, back to Hannah Arendt. This quote, based on her experience of living through the horrors of the 1930s is as vitally important today as it was back then.
"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist."
In other words, if you want to subvert democracy, the first thing you do is destroy the concept of objective truth in people's heads. Then you can fill it with your own "truth".
Trump is the poster boy for that of course. He's ideal, not because he's an ideologue deliberately pursuing a strategic plan, but because he lies as easily (and more regularly) than he shits. But there are a lot of politicians around tese days who are systematically undermining the concept of objective truth. They lie and lie and lie, then say "well EVERYONE lies. Believe what you want."
The biggest battle today is not about Leave or Remain. It's not even about Right and Left. It's about the concept of objective truth. It's about the ability to determine who is being truthful and who is leading you by the nose for their own ends. Lose that battle, as Hannah Arendt well knew, and you are heading into a very dark place.
That's one reason why I respect Peter Oborne and despise Nigel Farage, even though they are not that far apart in their political views. One prizes truth and honesty above everything. The other would lie to you about the time of day if it helped him achieve what he wants.
Why did you insinuate there was a black and white difference between fascism and socialism?
-
No BB. Why on earth would you read that into what I said?
The answer is to look at the track records of people telling you things. To look around and see whether there is independent evidence to support what they say.
Simple example.
Back in 2016, Trump said he'd love to release his tax returns but he couldn't as they were under audit. He said he'd release them when the audit had finished.
The tax office said that there was no reason whatsoever why they couldn't be released while under audit.
Trump's lawyer said this weekend that Trump will never release his tax returns.
With that information at your disposal, do you think Trump was being honest and truthful when he gave his reason for not releasing his returns and said he would love to do so in 2016?
Or, if that one's too rich for your taste, how about Trump claiming that Mueller's report "totally exonerated" him, when a direct line from the report specifically said he was not exonerated?
Or, back at home, what about Farage insisting in very aggressive terms in 2012 that he had nothing to do with the batshit 2010 UKIP manifesto (which demanded among other things, that taxi drivers wear uniforms and trains be painted in traditional livery colours) when he had written and signed off the Executive Summary and launched the document at a press conference.
In general terms, if someone insists A is true, but there is documentary evidence to say that A is false, would you, as an intelligent person, trust that person the next time they told you something? Or would you work on the assumption that if they have a track record of lying, you'd be better served not believing them in future without good evidence?
If you were stood at a window with someone and it was clearly raining outside but they insisted it wasn't, would you trust them the next time they told you what the weather was?
BS. You advising me to read up is the best laugh I've had in what's looking like a very depressing week.
As it happens, I'm currently reading "The Origins of Totalitarianism" by Hannah Arendt. Fascinating central theme that democracy becomes endangered when there is an alliance between what she calls "The Elite and the Mob". Jacob Ress-Mogg and Tommy Robinson for example. (It was ever thus of course. The Roman Republic was undermined and eventually destroyed by elites who used the plebs as their muscle. And over the pond, billionaires are telling rednecks that they, together, can MAGA.)
Anyway, back to Hannah Arendt. This quote, based on her experience of living through the horrors of the 1930s is as vitally important today as it was back then.
"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist."
In other words, if you want to subvert democracy, the first thing you do is destroy the concept of objective truth in people's heads. Then you can fill it with your own "truth".
Trump is the poster boy for that of course. He's ideal, not because he's an ideologue deliberately pursuing a strategic plan, but because he lies as easily (and more regularly) than he shits. But there are a lot of politicians around tese days who are systematically undermining the concept of objective truth. They lie and lie and lie, then say "well EVERYONE lies. Believe what you want."
The biggest battle today is not about Leave or Remain. It's not even about Right and Left. It's about the concept of objective truth. It's about the ability to determine who is being truthful and who is leading you by the nose for their own ends. Lose that battle, as Hannah Arendt well knew, and you are heading into a very dark place.
That's one reason why I respect Peter Oborne and despise Nigel Farage, even though they are not that far apart in their political views. One prizes truth and honesty above everything. The other would lie to you about the time of day if it helped him achieve what he wants.
Why did you insinuate there was a black and white difference between fascism and socialism?
Out of that entire post, THAT is what you choose to respond to?
-
Theresa May has been holding talks with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, in Berlin, ahead of tomorrow’s emergency EU summit on Brexit. Later she will be flying to Paris for talks with the French president, Emmanuel Macron. May will be asking the leaders of the two most powerful countries in the UK to back her request for another article 50 extension, ending on 30 June. If they are not amenable to that, she will be seeking an extension on the least-onerous terms available to the UK.
Britain is likely to be offered a final long extension ending on 31 December after the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, failed to convince the the bloc’s capitals that Theresa May has a plan to break the Brexit impasse.
Barnier has sought to intensify pressure on May to agree to the UK staying in the customs union, saying a new approach of this kind would be the sort of plan needed to justify the UK getting a long article 50 extension. (See 11.17am.)
The German government has rejected a claim from Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, that Merkel might be wiling to reopen the withdrawal agreement. (See 10.32am.) Barnier also rejected the idea. (See 11.17am.)
Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has said that staying in the customs union would be “the worst of both worlds” for the UK. (See 11.49am.)
Mark Francois, the vice chair of the European Research Group, which represents hardline Tory Brexiters, has said the EU will regret allowing the UK to stay if it grants an article 50 extension. In a speech to the Bruges Group at lunchtime, Francois said:
My message to the European council tomorrow night would be as follows:
“This is the 21st century and you cannot hold a nation captive against their will. There is no point granting a temporary extension to kick the can down the road in the hope that we will finally ratify the withdrawal agreement, as we never will.
“If, however, you attempt to hold us in the European Union against the democratically expressed will of the British people then, in return, we will become a “Trojan horse” within the EU, which would utterly derail all your attempts to pursue a more federal project.
“A new Conservative government, led by someone like Boris Johnson or Dominic Raab, might vote down your budget, veto your attempts at greater military integration, and generally make it impossible for you to bring about the more federal project in which you so desperately believe” ...
So my earnest message to the European council is simple. Brexit has already gone on long enough.
If you now try to hold on to us against our will, you will be facing Perfidious Albion on speed. It would therefore be much better for all our sakes if we were to pursue our separate destinies, in a spirit of mutual respect.
As Boris Johnson recently quoted Moses’ warning to Pharaoh – “Let my people go!”
Looks like it's going to be a festive brexitcon with a customs union in everyone's stocking.
-
No BB. Why on earth would you read that into what I said?
The answer is to look at the track records of people telling you things. To look around and see whether there is independent evidence to support what they say.
Simple example.
Back in 2016, Trump said he'd love to release his tax returns but he couldn't as they were under audit. He said he'd release them when the audit had finished.
The tax office said that there was no reason whatsoever why they couldn't be released while under audit.
Trump's lawyer said this weekend that Trump will never release his tax returns.
With that information at your disposal, do you think Trump was being honest and truthful when he gave his reason for not releasing his returns and said he would love to do so in 2016?
Or, if that one's too rich for your taste, how about Trump claiming that Mueller's report "totally exonerated" him, when a direct line from the report specifically said he was not exonerated?
Or, back at home, what about Farage insisting in very aggressive terms in 2012 that he had nothing to do with the batshit 2010 UKIP manifesto (which demanded among other things, that taxi drivers wear uniforms and trains be painted in traditional livery colours) when he had written and signed off the Executive Summary and launched the document at a press conference.
In general terms, if someone insists A is true, but there is documentary evidence to say that A is false, would you, as an intelligent person, trust that person the next time they told you something? Or would you work on the assumption that if they have a track record of lying, you'd be better served not believing them in future without good evidence?
If you were stood at a window with someone and it was clearly raining outside but they insisted it wasn't, would you trust them the next time they told you what the weather was?
BS. You advising me to read up is the best laugh I've had in what's looking like a very depressing week.
As it happens, I'm currently reading "The Origins of Totalitarianism" by Hannah Arendt. Fascinating central theme that democracy becomes endangered when there is an alliance between what she calls "The Elite and the Mob". Jacob Ress-Mogg and Tommy Robinson for example. (It was ever thus of course. The Roman Republic was undermined and eventually destroyed by elites who used the plebs as their muscle. And over the pond, billionaires are telling rednecks that they, together, can MAGA.)
Anyway, back to Hannah Arendt. This quote, based on her experience of living through the horrors of the 1930s is as vitally important today as it was back then.
"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist."
In other words, if you want to subvert democracy, the first thing you do is destroy the concept of objective truth in people's heads. Then you can fill it with your own "truth".
Trump is the poster boy for that of course. He's ideal, not because he's an ideologue deliberately pursuing a strategic plan, but because he lies as easily (and more regularly) than he shits. But there are a lot of politicians around tese days who are systematically undermining the concept of objective truth. They lie and lie and lie, then say "well EVERYONE lies. Believe what you want."
The biggest battle today is not about Leave or Remain. It's not even about Right and Left. It's about the concept of objective truth. It's about the ability to determine who is being truthful and who is leading you by the nose for their own ends. Lose that battle, as Hannah Arendt well knew, and you are heading into a very dark place.
That's one reason why I respect Peter Oborne and despise Nigel Farage, even though they are not that far apart in their political views. One prizes truth and honesty above everything. The other would lie to you about the time of day if it helped him achieve what he wants.
Why did you insinuate there was a black and white difference between fascism and socialism?
Out of that entire post, THAT is what you choose to respond to?
🤦♂️
Because that was my original point
-
Oh dear, a report bears out what most of us already knew.
Matt Hancock says Tories are 'finished' if they become 'only Brexit party'
''The report, by Onward, is actually quite alarming stuff for Tories, revealing that the “tipping point” age at which more people support the Conservatives rather than Labour has advanced four years – from 47 to 51 – in just the last two years, since the 2017 election''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/apr/09/brexit-latest-developments-news-theresa-may-visits-berlin-and-paris-as-gauke-plays-down-prospect-of-early-breakthrough-in-talks-with-labour-live-news#comments
-
"If you try to hold us against our will, you will be faced with Perfidious Albion on speed" - a direct quote from Mark Francois just now. This really happened.
-
You remember, the one where you said you'd rather be cut off like North Korea and/or living in a garden shed.
If it was that or a United States of Europe then yes I would take to the shed.
In a few years when we are all back in horse and carts we will all be back in sheds like when it was Uncles Silas's time.
-
BS. I didn't.
-
Did he really?
Well he also said. If we must choose between Europe and the open sea, we must choose the open sea. (the world)
Did he really?
When exactly did Winston Churchill say that phrase please as I can't find him ever saying it?
-
"If you try to hold us against our will, you will be faced with Perfidious Albion on speed" - a direct quote from Mark Francois just now. This really happened.
Is that one of Hawkwind's albums - quoted by a bloke who on one of his better day comes out with stuff that would be to weird even for Hawkwind...
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
-
''Britain is still a member of the EU thanks to people who wished it wasn’t. Brexit has already been delayed once because MPs who think it should happen voted against the deal that would have made it happen. Now Theresa May is going to Brussels to postpone it further. Such self-thwarting is a feat of slapstick political gymnastics, like falling up a flight of stairs''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/09/brexit-worth-it-public-question-referendum
-
''Britain is still a member of the EU thanks to people who wished it wasn’t. Brexit has already been delayed once because MPs who think it should happen voted against the deal that would have made it happen. Now Theresa May is going to Brussels to postpone it further. Such self-thwarting is a feat of slapstick political gymnastics, like falling up a flight of stairs''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/09/brexit-worth-it-public-question-referendum
Sorry Sydney, you've lost me. But to be fair I no longer know what is going on.
There does need to be a lengthy extension, a change of Tory leader and then a General Election. Although I can't see that scenario happening. Welcome to Hotel California Brexit, where we check out but never leave.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
-
''Britain is still a member of the EU thanks to people who wished it wasn’t. Brexit has already been delayed once because MPs who think it should happen voted against the deal that would have made it happen. Now Theresa May is going to Brussels to postpone it further. Such self-thwarting is a feat of slapstick political gymnastics, like falling up a flight of stairs''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/09/brexit-worth-it-public-question-referendum
Sorry Sydney, you've lost me. But to be fair I no longer know what is going on.
There does need to be a lengthy extension, a change of Tory leader and then a General Election. Although I can't see that scenario happening. Welcome to Hotel California Brexit, where we check out but never leave.
It's just an article outlining the shambles brexit is with those that want to leave voting to stand in the way and now asking for an extension which further delays leaving.
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
''Broken Britain - new:
-63% say "system rigged to help the rich & powerful"
-56% "Britain is in decline"
-54% "Britain needs strong leader willing to break rules"
-50% "Politicians don't care about people like me"
-47% "feel I've no influence over decisions" (new high)''
I'm surprised only 63% think the system is against them when you look at zero hours contracts, food banks and Austerity but I suppose it's not uncommon for some people forced by Austerity to take zero hours contract work and then having to go to food banks to be able to eat.
6,072,095 signatures
Number of people receiving three days' worth of emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017/18, by region*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382725/foodbanks-emergency-food-needed-in-united-kingdom-uk-by-region/
-
And for a bit of variation .......................
Brexit re article 50 it must not be suspended/stopped under any circumstances
the full details are well known to everyone the media has covered it fully
This petition is closed 116,485 signatures
Leave the EU immediately
The Government should walk away from the Article 50 negotiations and leave the EU immediately with no deal. The EU looks set to offer us a punishment deal out of spite. Why wait another 18 months when we could leave right away and fully take back control of our country, lawmaking powers and borders?
This petition is closed 141,835 signatures
Ensure that the U.K. leaves the EU Single Market & Customs Union.
On 23rd June 2016, the U.K. voted by majority to leave the EU. In the 2017 General Election, the two main parties promised to leave the single market & customs union and subsequently they received an 80% vote share. Therefore the government must be able to withdraw the U.K. from the Customs Union.
This petition is closed 81,192 signatures
Withdraw the UK from the EU even if Parliament rejects the final Brexit deal.
We, the undersigned believe that the decision of the British people to leave the EU should be honoured by Parliament.
We therefore call upon all MPs to accept that a vote by them to reject the final Brexit deal will mean that the UK will leave the EU and revert to trading under WTO Rules.
This petition is closed 8,344 signatures
Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.
The government repeatedly claims exiting the EU is 'the will of the people'. We need to put a stop to this claim by proving the strength of public support now, for remaining in the EU. A People's Vote may not happen - so vote now.
Sign this petition 6,072,168 signatures
Catherine McKinnell said during the petition debate
The vote leave statement was:
“Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop—we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave.”
''Or the pledge made in the 2017 Labour party manifesto:
“Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option”.
Or, indeed, the 2017 Conservative party manifesto, which said that the Prime Minister would deliver:
“The best possible deal for Britain as we leave the European Union delivered by a smooth, orderly Brexit.”
Just sayin'
-
So the vote leave statement was b*llocks then.?
-
Sydney those manifestos and people also all said Brexit has to happen - just saying.
-
BFYP
Strictly speaking, the Labour manifesto did not say Brexit has to happen.
It said that Labour accepted the result of the referendum and would put the national interest first.
That's the sleight of hand from Corbyn that I've been talking about for the past 2 years.
In any case, policies have to change as circumstances change. Insisting that manifesto committments are sacrosanct (especially for a party that lost the election) is absurd.
-
Sydney those manifestos and people also all said Brexit has to happen - just saying.
That's right, many people have said many things and we should recognise it's a fluid situation but I think we can finally rule out no-deal and rule in a CU ........ of some sort. There is going to be a lot of disappointment because very few if any will get all they want.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Spoken like a true Leeds Fan
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Spoken like a true Leeds Fan
Leeds fan? What on earth are you talking about?
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
-
Scawsby, I think it's what they call grown-up politics.
-
Steve, if you have a zimmer frame don't let anyone hold that against you hun x
-
I have debated brexit on here and I don’t remember ever insulting anyone over their age.
-
It'll be interesting to wake up tomorrow morning and find out what has happened at the summit tonight. Surely if the EU27 will only grant a long-ish extension then May must resign?
Although everyone assumes that the Tory Party will elect a Hard Brexiteer, they might elect someone who took a more pragmatic view, for instance over a second referendum. He or she will have their own Red Lines, but they might not be the same as May's. Also a new PM might want to have a General Election, which could also break the logjam in Parliament.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
Being a hypocrite is when you start to do exactly what you say others shouldn't do.
-
It'll be interesting to wake up tomorrow morning and find out what has happened at the summit tonight. Surely if the EU27 will only grant a long-ish extension then May must resign?
Although everyone assumes that the Tory Party will elect a Hard Brexiteer, they might elect someone who took a more pragmatic view, for instance over a second referendum. He or she will have their own Red Lines, but they might not be the same as May's. Also a new PM might want to have a General Election, which could also break the logjam in Parliament.
If the Tories elect a Hard Brexiter, there's no guarantee they'll be PM. In an extreme case it could even make Corbyn PM without an election.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
Being a hypocrite is when you start to do exactly what you say others shouldn't do.
So if someone thumps you on the nose, you're just going to take it and not thump them back?
-
Steve, if you have a zimmer frame don't let anyone hold that against you hun x
Nice one Donny. Seriously though, I'm lucky at my age to be able to walk many miles at a good pace, but some can't. It's those people that I'm defending when I kick off on here.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
Being a hypocrite is when you start to do exactly what you say others shouldn't do.
So if someone thumps you on the nose, you're just going to take it and not thump them back?
If I told someone they shouldn't thump people on the nose and then did the same myself, I'd be a hypocrite.
-
It'll be interesting to wake up tomorrow morning and find out what has happened at the summit tonight. Surely if the EU27 will only grant a long-ish extension then May must resign?
Although everyone assumes that the Tory Party will elect a Hard Brexiteer, they might elect someone who took a more pragmatic view, for instance over a second referendum. He or she will have their own Red Lines, but they might not be the same as May's. Also a new PM might want to have a General Election, which could also break the logjam in Parliament.
There is absolutely no way that the next Tory leader won't be a Brexiteer - as if they aren't there wont be a party left for them to lead.
In the last poll I saw 75% of the Tory party membership wanted to leave with no deal. They have already started de-selecting MP's who they feel are 'betraying' them by wanting a 'softer' deal, David Gauke, an actual minister, was on the radio today saying that moves are underway in his constituency to remove him. If they even try to elect a new leader without going to the membership, as they did with May, or put forward two candidates neither of whom is a Brexiteer there won't be a party left to elect them, those members will be furious.
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/04/our-survey-how-party-members-would-cast-indicative-votes-they-are-overwhelmingly-for-no-deal.html
-
Between Thatcher and Cameron the Tories had a bad habit of getting their leaders in the wrong order. It was pointless choosing Hague, who had the potential to be a half-decent PM in 1997 when it was obvious they couldn't win the next Election.
They've done it again. After Cameron they needed a Brexiteer to deliver Brexit. Post-Brexit, they needed someone to bring the country together. They probably will choose a Brexiteer, and consign themselves to opposition for at least a decade.
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
''Broken Britain - new:
-63% say "system rigged to help the rich & powerful"
-56% "Britain is in decline"
-54% "Britain needs strong leader willing to break rules"
-50% "Politicians don't care about people like me"
-47% "feel I've no influence over decisions" (new high)''
I'm surprised only 63% think the system is against them when you look at zero hours contracts, food banks and Austerity but I suppose it's not uncommon for some people forced by Austerity to take zero hours contract work and then having to go to food banks to be able to eat.
6,072,095 signatures
Number of people receiving three days' worth of emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017/18, by region*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382725/foodbanks-emergency-food-needed-in-united-kingdom-uk-by-region/
what would you do about zero hour contracts thou, as of 2018 there was around 950k on zhc if that number around 70/75 percent wanted to be on them.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Never met him,pmed him,supported him. I'm as f**ked off with all this daft b*llocks as you. I'm going to join the BB,BS,AL,SS alliance.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
White gammon?
Where did you pull that one from?
Proper snowflake!
-
Scawsby, I think it's what they call grown-up politics.
I'm late to the party BB. I thought it was all about witty plays on names. Wigerley,Siderner, Bullshitter. Etc
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
''Broken Britain - new:
-63% say "system rigged to help the rich & powerful"
-56% "Britain is in decline"
-54% "Britain needs strong leader willing to break rules"
-50% "Politicians don't care about people like me"
-47% "feel I've no influence over decisions" (new high)''
I'm surprised only 63% think the system is against them when you look at zero hours contracts, food banks and Austerity but I suppose it's not uncommon for some people forced by Austerity to take zero hours contract work and then having to go to food banks to be able to eat.
6,072,095 signatures
Number of people receiving three days' worth of emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017/18, by region*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382725/foodbanks-emergency-food-needed-in-united-kingdom-uk-by-region/
what would you do about zero hour contracts thou, as of 2018 there was around 950k on zhc if that number around 70/75 percent wanted to be on them.
"it's reported by whom, employers? What's to like the low pay, no job security, can't get a loan to buy a house, no set hours, no rights .......................................
As the gig economy reaches new heights, and DPD drivers reveal its downsides, employers should beware of the tables turning
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/05/zero-hours-contracts-dpd-couriers-justice
Zero-hours contracts affect young people's health, study finds
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/zero-hours-contracts-affect-young-peoples-health-study-finds
-
The day of the dead emerges as possible deadline, how appropriate?
More on the possibility of October as a new deadline. This is from the Sunday Times’ Andrew Byrne.
Andrew Byrne (@aqbyrne)
UPDATE: A compromise proposal has emerged for an October 31st (Halloween) extension. It’s backed by Sweden, Denmark, Ireland and others. It splits the difference between long and short and cuts off just before new Commission is due to take office. 🎃 https://t.co/q5sCAZ4d7r
April 10, 2019
-
TRB
Go on then. I'll bite. How was a Brexit PM going to deliver Brexit?
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
''Broken Britain - new:
-63% say "system rigged to help the rich & powerful"
-56% "Britain is in decline"
-54% "Britain needs strong leader willing to break rules"
-50% "Politicians don't care about people like me"
-47% "feel I've no influence over decisions" (new high)''
I'm surprised only 63% think the system is against them when you look at zero hours contracts, food banks and Austerity but I suppose it's not uncommon for some people forced by Austerity to take zero hours contract work and then having to go to food banks to be able to eat.
6,072,095 signatures
Number of people receiving three days' worth of emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017/18, by region*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382725/foodbanks-emergency-food-needed-in-united-kingdom-uk-by-region/
what would you do about zero hour contracts thou, as of 2018 there was around 950k on zhc if that number around 70/75 percent wanted to be on them.
"it's reported by whom, employers? What's to like the low pay, no job security, can't get a loan to buy a house, no set hours, no rights .......................................
As the gig economy reaches new heights, and DPD drivers reveal its downsides, employers should beware of the tables turning
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/05/zero-hours-contracts-dpd-couriers-justice
Zero-hours contracts affect young people's health, study finds
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/zero-hours-contracts-affect-young-peoples-health-study-finds
the flexible hours are what i presume they like being able to pick and choose there hours where if they didn’t work zhc they would not be able to do that,dont get me wrong they certainly are not for everyone and i feel for anyone forced to work that way but at the same time many students and older people would not be able to work without them
-
Pandora's Box now open - official.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1115524497724063744?p=v
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-47824367
''Broken Britain - new:
-63% say "system rigged to help the rich & powerful"
-56% "Britain is in decline"
-54% "Britain needs strong leader willing to break rules"
-50% "Politicians don't care about people like me"
-47% "feel I've no influence over decisions" (new high)''
I'm surprised only 63% think the system is against them when you look at zero hours contracts, food banks and Austerity but I suppose it's not uncommon for some people forced by Austerity to take zero hours contract work and then having to go to food banks to be able to eat.
6,072,095 signatures
Number of people receiving three days' worth of emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2017/18, by region*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382725/foodbanks-emergency-food-needed-in-united-kingdom-uk-by-region/
what would you do about zero hour contracts thou, as of 2018 there was around 950k on zhc if that number around 70/75 percent wanted to be on them.
"it's reported by whom, employers? What's to like the low pay, no job security, can't get a loan to buy a house, no set hours, no rights .......................................
As the gig economy reaches new heights, and DPD drivers reveal its downsides, employers should beware of the tables turning
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/05/zero-hours-contracts-dpd-couriers-justice
Zero-hours contracts affect young people's health, study finds
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/zero-hours-contracts-affect-young-peoples-health-study-finds
the flexible hours are what i presume they like being able to pick and choose there hours where if they didn’t work zhc they would not be able to do that,dont get me wrong they certainly are not for everyone and i feel for anyone forced to work that way but at the same time many students and older people would not be able to work without them
I accept that is what you think BP I don't have a problem with that, and I know some on the forum for some reason don't like links being posted as supporting ''evidence'' but here is a prime example where it would be useful to dig out some supporting polls to show that what you are saying is supported by evidence. I agree there has to be some that like the option of working odd hours when they want but 70-75%?
-
I suspect there are some statistics but I haven't seen them.
In my experience I've seen good and bad of them. I once had a zero hours contract as a student and didn't get enough out of it, that is where they clearly do not work. I also have seen it work in my professional career particularly around working parents, those of certain age brackets etc where they can use it flexibly around their balanced home life - that is hugely important for many. So there are positives and negatives. I don't know what the solution is for the abuse of them though.
-
Scawsby, I think it's what they call grown-up politics.
I'm late to the party BB. I thought it was all about witty plays on names. Wigerley,Siderner, Bullshitter. Etc
I'm not one that preaches about grown-up politics. If I was I'd be a hypocrite.
-
So the goatf**k keeps on rolling for another 6 months..
-
So the goatf**k keeps on rolling for another 6 months..
I don't think so I think they'll get rid of her
-
TRB
Go on then. I'll bite. How was a Brexit PM going to deliver Brexit?
I'll come back on this later, but the key point is something you have said before and which I agree with. On 24th June 2016 no-one knew exactly what Brexit looked like. It was up to whoever became PM to determine that.
-
It'll be interesting to wake up tomorrow morning and find out what has happened at the summit tonight. Surely if the EU27 will only grant a long-ish extension then May must resign?
I'm struck by how quickly the 27 EU members seem able to lock themselves away and agree on a plan. That's 27 EU members, all reaching a unanimous decision in one late-night sitting!
What a stark contrast to the shower we're lumbered with in our Government.
Can you imagine the outcry if the EU27 had delayed and procrastinated and deliberated and disagreed week after week during these past months?
We certainly can't blame them for the on-going delays and missed deadlines.
It's beyond embarrassing.
-
TRB
Go on then. I'll bite. How was a Brexit PM going to deliver Brexit?
I'll come back on this later, but the key point is something you have said before and which I agree with. On 24th June 2016 no-one knew exactly what Brexit looked like. It was up to whoever became PM to determine that.
Precisely. But that required a PM who could find a consensus in the House, not interpret the vote as justifying a particular hard firm of Brexit.
And there's the rub.
There were never enough hard Brexiters in Parliament to support a hard Brexit.
There WERE potentially enough MPs to support a soft Brexit, (CU/SM membership). But a Tory PM pushing that line would lead to the biggest split in the Tory party since the Corn Laws.
And the refusal to choose the right way for the country on that point is why we are where we are now. There is no way that a true Brexit believer PM would have made any other choice. So we'd still come to this point. The immovable object of the need to maintain Tory party unity, against the irresistible force of Parliamentary numbers.
Now that we are here, there's no way Labour are going to compromise with May. The recent talks are all for show. The sub-text is that May has put her party into a literally impossible position. That's HER choice. Labour aren't going to give her a way out. Or at least not without a price that destroys the Tory party.
Welcome to yet another six months of squaring the circle.
-
Another day, another Today interview from John Humphrys where he doesn't once challenge the stream of lies from a Brexiteer. David Davis was again on the air shilling the Malthouse Compromise, again offering non-existent "technology" as a solution to the Irish border, again saying we should reopen the WA... completely unchallenged.
-
MM
Amazing isn't it?
Dianne Abbott gets some numbers wrong on air and she's forever useless. Davis can repeatedly come back peddling this zombie idea and he's a serious politician.
-
Scawsby, I think it's what they call grown-up politics.
I'm late to the party BB. I thought it was all about witty plays on names. Wigerley,Siderner, Bullshitter. Etc
I'm not one that preaches about grown-up politics. If I was I'd be a hypocrite.
Aye. You're consistent. Good to see that you don't practice what you don't preach.
-
Yay, 6 more months of the hysteria on here......
-
The discourse has shifted completely. I heard Farage on LBC the other day describe Britain as a colony of the European empire. Those were his exact words.
-
It'll be interesting to wake up tomorrow morning and find out what has happened at the summit tonight. Surely if the EU27 will only grant a long-ish extension then May must resign?
I'm struck by how quickly the 27 EU members seem able to lock themselves away and agree on a plan. That's 27 EU members, all reaching a unanimous decision in one late-night sitting!
What a stark contrast to the shower we're lumbered with in our Government.
Can you imagine the outcry if the EU27 had delayed and procrastinated and deliberated and disagreed week after week during these past months?
We certainly can't blame them for the on-going delays and missed deadlines.
It's beyond embarrassing.
And I keep coming back to the same question I've raised a few times now... why are we voting to give these people more control and power?
-
The discourse has shifted completely. I heard Farage on LBC the other day describe Britain as a colony of the European empire. Those were his exact words.
Aye.
But the trouble is, he's preaching to a constituency of several million idiots who lap up that sort of bullshit.
-
The discourse has shifted completely. I heard Farage on LBC the other day describe Britain as a colony of the European empire. Those were his exact words.
Aye.
But the trouble is, he's preaching to a constituency of several million idiots who lap up that sort of bullshit.
Why is that bullshit?
-
He's a politician, all they speak is bullshit
-
AL.
Let me think...
...oh aye. Because we're not a colony of the EU. We could leave tomorrow if we wanted to. So, as I say, it's bullshit deliberately aimed at idiots.
-
TRB
Go on then. I'll bite. How was a Brexit PM going to deliver Brexit?
Run the clock down?
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
-
As a nation we have done nothing in almost three years to give any other trading bloc or nation the impression that we are capable of negotiating or delivering on any trade deal.
We are going nowhere until politicians of all persuasions find common ground and work solely for the benefit of the future of the country.
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
Do nothing and leave on WTO like we voted for, before the people in parliament who are supposed to represent us put their spoke in and ignored the leave map of England.
-
Catherine McKinnell said during the petition debate
The vote leave statement was:
“Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop—we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave.”
''Or the pledge made in the 2017 Labour party manifesto:
“Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option”.
Or, indeed, the 2017 Conservative party manifesto, which said that the Prime Minister would deliver:
“The best possible deal for Britain as we leave the European Union delivered by a smooth, orderly Brexit.”
6,074,262 signatures
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
Do nothing and leave on WTO like we voted for, before the people in parliament who are supposed to represent us put their spoke in and ignored the leave map of England.
I don’t remember “leave on WTO” being on the ballot paper.??
-
“We will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave”
Can anyone show me how this was honoured.??
-
“We will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave”
Can anyone show me how this was honoured.??
Was that a pin dropping?
-
Not with me, I have always advocated knowing what leave means should have been defined before the referendum.
The point in the quote was to highlight that the vote leave campaign did not imply “no deal”..
-
Not with me, I have always advocated knowing what leave means should have been defined before the referendum.
The point in the quote was to highlight that the vote leave campaign did not imply “no deal”..
Apologies I should have used the sarky imoji
-
See, if you really want to be a plebiscitary democracy, you've got to have checks and balances on what happens during campaigns.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47879777
Here's the Swiss courts annulling a referendum because the voters weren't given the suitable facts.
Just close your eyes and imagine what that court would make of our 2016 clusterf**k.
-
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=AA506B4A1D9760CE653FECC3DBCBA11FE0E13948&thid=OIP.jHRemUT1pSKsr17tiD-d-wHaD0&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ctvnews.ca%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.2960819!%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.png_gen%2Fderivatives%2Flandscape_620%2Fimage.png&exph=320&expw=620&q=brexit+leave+map&selectedindex=0&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&eim=1,2,6
-
Brexit, a fine example of a public sector ran project
-
Not sure what your point is AL? Most regions in England had a vote leave majority, no one is debating that..
What is the issue is what the leave deal will entail, and avoiding no deal, which itself wasn’t the definition of leave at the time of the referendum..
-
Not sure what your point is AL? Most regions in England had a vote leave majority, no one is debating that..
What is the issue is what the leave deal will entail, and avoiding no deal, which itself wasn’t the definition of leave at the time of the referendum..
The point is vast swathes of the country aren't getting what they voted for due to politicians ignoring their constituents wishes. If that map represented a GE result it would have been a landslide. We then would not have been debating the result forever and a day afterwards.
-
Glad you compared this to a GE because if a government fails abjectly to deliver what they were voted in for, landslide or not, they can be voted out..
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
Do nothing and leave on WTO like we voted for, before the people in parliament who are supposed to represent us put their spoke in and ignored the leave map of England.
I don’t remember “leave on WTO” being on the ballot paper.??
I don't remember "deal" being on the ballot paper either
-
Slightly O/T but fair play to Theresa for managing to toxify the Tory brand.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1116208675306209280?p=v
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
Do nothing and leave on WTO like we voted for, before the people in parliament who are supposed to represent us put their spoke in and ignored the leave map of England.
I don’t remember “leave on WTO” being on the ballot paper.??
I don't remember "deal" being on the ballot paper either
Well that's precisely the point... many people will have been voting for different things that were under one umbrella term.
-
Slightly O/T but fair play to Theresa for managing to toxify the Tory brand.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1116208675306209280?p=v
So you would rather have Corbyn and his band of Marxist thugs 'running' the country. we would be like 1970's Albania in no time.
You'd better find a good gardener if Labour get in to help grow some money trees.
-
What in God's name are you wittering on about?
Do nothing and leave on WTO like we voted for, before the people in parliament who are supposed to represent us put their spoke in and ignored the leave map of England.
I don’t remember “leave on WTO” being on the ballot paper.??
I don't remember "deal" being on the ballot paper either
No it wasn’t but I was only countering what AL had posted about WTO.. I didn’t mention “deal” on the ballot paper..
As stated earlier today, the vote leave policy was to negotiate terms.. I assume they meant a deal, if not, what.??
-
Slightly O/T but fair play to Theresa for managing to toxify the Tory brand.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1116208675306209280?p=v
So you would rather have Corbyn and his band of Marxist thugs 'running' the country. we would be like 1970's Albania in no time.
You'd better find a good gardener if Labour get in to help grow some money trees.
No, I'd rather have the Tories choose a proper leader. Problem is the ERG went off half-cock and she can't be removed till December.
Those poll figures hardly make confortable reading for Labour. They might be the biggest party but they'd struggle for a majority.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Never met him,pmed him,supported him. I'm as f**ked off with all this daft b*llocks as you. I'm going to join the BB,BS,AL,SS alliance.
You're very welcome mate; after all, we're all Rovers fans. COYR.
-
Slightly O/T but fair play to Theresa for managing to toxify the Tory brand.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1116208675306209280?p=v
So you would rather have Corbyn and his band of Marxist thugs 'running' the country. we would be like 1970's Albania in no time.
You'd better find a good gardener if Labour get in to help grow some money trees.
No, I'd rather have the Tories choose a proper leader. Problem is the ERG went off half-cock and she can't be removed till December.
Those poll figures hardly make confortable reading for Labour. They might be the biggest party but they'd struggle for a majority.
I actually like my local MP, he makes himself available to take your concerns on board and always replies to e-mails. It will be a shame for the likes of him that he will likely loose his seat thanks to the likes of TM and Anna Soubry.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
White gammon?
Where did you pull that one from?
Proper snowflake!
I don't like telling tales out of school mate, but it was Sydney Rover.
-
AL.
Let me think...
...oh aye. Because we're not a colony of the EU. We could leave tomorrow if we wanted to. So, as I say, it's bullshit deliberately aimed at idiots.
BULLSEYE!!!
-
Bill Cash on Sky tv
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsPolitics/status/1116358104935956484
Can I categorically state that I do not believe Mr Cash is a Marxist thug even though he is plotting to overthrow an elected prime minister.
-
AL.
Let me think...
...oh aye. Because we're not a colony of the EU. We could leave tomorrow if we wanted to. So, as I say, it's bullshit deliberately aimed at idiots.
BULLSEYE!!!
For the record, it's Farage treating people as idiots by serving this rubbish up to them and expecting them to agree with it.
-
Not sure what your point is AL? Most regions in England had a vote leave majority, no one is debating that..
What is the issue is what the leave deal will entail, and avoiding no deal, which itself wasn’t the definition of leave at the time of the referendum..
The point is vast swathes of the country aren't getting what they voted for due to politicians ignoring their constituents wishes. If that map represented a GE result it would have been a landslide. We then would not have been debating the result forever and a day afterwards.
I've never met you AL but you claim to know exactly why I voted leave.
Just the same as some people that insulted and assaulted immigrants soon after the vote assumed that they reflected my views. I certainly didn't want or vote for the omnishambles that has followed. The remain side didn't cover themselves with glory but the Brexit side have contributed nothing to a stable and civilised exit from the EU.
-
I would take a guess the majority of Brexit voters voted that way because of the leave campaign and the actual lies they were told. The politicians in the Leave camp also stated we would get a great deal with the EU, and from recollection none of them endorsed leaving on WTO terms. So when Brexit votes say, "but we voted to leave regardless" that's no strictly true now, is it.
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
White gammon?
Where did you pull that one from?
Proper snowflake!
I don't like telling tales out of school mate, but it was Sydney Rover.
Incorrect, and for the record I wrote 'old white gammon'
-
I would take a guess the majority of Brexit voters voted that way because of the leave campaign and the actual lies they were told. The politicians in the Leave camp also stated we would get a great deal with the EU, and from recollection none of them endorsed leaving on WTO terms. So when Brexit votes say, "but we voted to leave regardless" that's no strictly true now, is it.
No but let's not let facts get in the way of leave voters points.
-
I would take a guess the majority of Brexit voters voted that way because of the leave campaign and the actual lies they were told. The politicians in the Leave camp also stated we would get a great deal with the EU, and from recollection none of them endorsed leaving on WTO terms. So when Brexit votes say, "but we voted to leave regardless" that's no strictly true now, is it.
No but let's not let facts get in the way of leave voters points.
Nope BJW
-
Yeah, like you lot keep beefing about it was only 52% of the poll who voted for leave but are happy enough with a single vote win in parliament.
How long does the Brexit referendum result stay relevant?
Considering what we know now about what can actually be agreed, the consequences of no deal, how many brexiteers have died since 2016 and how many more remain votes have come of age, the fact all polls show remain would now win and the fact MP's are changing their minds almost daily about Brexit?
Just a guess here bj but as the majority of brexiteers seem to be old white gammon most of em may be in cardiac arrest over dealing with JC and No-deal kicked into touch.
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
There's a touch of hypocrisy in that post.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about you, Iberian Red
.
Dont worry fella, that will be an age thing.
Don't worry about me old lad, you just get on with what you're best at, kissing BST's arse.
Guess the author:
If you can't come on this forum without making abusive comments like that, then I suggest you just leave the forum, take your bigoted, biased opinions with you, and don't f*cking come back.
So you don't think I should respond to someone trying to take the p*ss out of my age, something that a few of you on here are quite smart at doing?
If someone attacks me, I attack back.
Spoken like a true hypocrite.
"Thick", "stupid", "can't write their own name", "pensioners with zimmer frames", "old white gammon", "soon be having cardiac arrests", "will be dead by now", "coffin dodgers".
Just a few of the many insults hurled at Brexit voters on this forum and many other forums over the last 2 years; and you call me abusive and hypocritical?
White gammon?
Where did you pull that one from?
Proper snowflake!
I don't like telling tales out of school mate, but it was Sydney Rover.
Incorrect, and for the record I wrote 'old white gammon'
So did I.
-
Cross-party talks going well, I see.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1116797245893091328?p=v
Although I can see why the Tories are keener on McDonnell and Long-Bailey (who are both close to Corbyn) that Starmer (who isn't). Corbyn is a lifelong Eurosceptic who wants us to leave with something similar (but different) to May's Deal. Starmer would rather have a Second Referendum and Remain.
From what Philip Hammond said today, I can see the Government presenting the May Deal (unamended) for another vote and raising the spectre of European Elections to try and get MPs to back it. The Tory hardliners won't, because they would like to see Farage's party and UKIP do well in the elections. But I don't see enough Labour MPs swinging behind May's Deal either.
Get ready to go out and vote on 23rd May.
-
I see Hammond has announced today that the Govt has spent £4bn on No Deal planning.
To put that into perspective, HS3 which isn't happening, would have cost £6bn over 6 years.
What a fantastic use of taxpayer's money from a Govt that has told us there isn't a magic money tree.
-
TRB did you see John McDonnell on Peston, you might wish to re-evalute your reading of that tweet?
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-11/why-labour-looks-set-to-become-the-referendum-party/
-
TRB did you see John McDonnell on Peston, you might wish to re-evalute your reading of that tweet?
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-11/why-labour-looks-set-to-become-the-referendum-party/
If that's true, you wonder why they have waited so long? Although the Labour Front Bench did support the Kyle / Wilson amendment which effectively says we agree to May's Deal subject to a confirmatory referendum.
I wonder if MV3 could be May plus the Government effectively accepting Kyle / Wilson and maybe Lisa Nandy's amendment allowing the HoC a say in the next phase of negotiations.
Should make for another interesting week when the Commons returns after Easter.
-
Corbyn's view of where they are: 'it is a challenge to negotiate with a Government that’s collapsing – when you can’t be sure if commitments made by the Prime Minister will survive the week and when Cabinet collective responsibility has given way to collective irresponsibility, with ministers contradicting each other on the airwaves.'
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-insists-theresa-may-must-compromise-on-brexit-red-lines_uk_5cb202a7e4b098b9a2d453c5?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
It's going nowhere slowly isn't it?
If you remember when she asked Corbyn to meet her for talks May also said that if they couldn't come up with a joint deal (ie she couldn't persuade Corbyn how good her deal really was and he had just been reading it wrong) then they should come up with a series of ideas for discussion as indicative votes. So that should come first before MV3.
-
Corbyn's view of where they are: 'it is a challenge to negotiate with a Government that’s collapsing – when you can’t be sure if commitments made by the Prime Minister will survive the week and when Cabinet collective responsibility has given way to collective irresponsibility, with ministers contradicting each other on the airwaves.'
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-insists-theresa-may-must-compromise-on-brexit-red-lines_uk_5cb202a7e4b098b9a2d453c5?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
It's going nowhere slowly isn't it?
If you remember when she asked Corbyn to meet her for talks May also said that if they couldn't come up with a joint deal (ie she couldn't persuade Corbyn how good her deal really was and he had just been reading it wrong) then they should come up with a series of ideas for discussion as indicative votes. So that should come first before MV3.
Imagine trying to discuss something with an organisation/person that has by trying to save its own skin has clearly made a massive error of judgement then allowed anyone and everyone to bas**rdise the debate that followed, refused to enter into negotiations with the party that represents a sizeable chunk of voters, spun out time and then enter into what can only be described as emergency talks refusing to change your position.
-
Have you seen this Sydney? https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/tory-mps-are-freaking-out-in-the-tea-rooms-about-what-the
Just a small flavour of the article here to show how difficult 'negotiating' with Theresa May might be on a lack of trust basis:
there is anger at what is perceived at May’s ongoing dishonesty with Tory MPs and the general public...
“She told us she would not call an election. She called an election. She said no British prime minister could ever agree to a Northern Ireland-only backstop. She agreed to a Northern Ireland-only backstop.
“She told us no deal was better than a bad deal. She would rather do anything but no deal. She told us she had secured legally binding changes to the backstop. Her attorney general confirmed the legal risk was unchanged.
“She told us she would never join a customs union. She told Labour her deal is a customs union in all but name. She told us hundreds of times we would leave on March 29. She stopped us leaving on March 29.
“She told us she could was not prepared to delay Brexit beyond June 30. She agreed a delay to October. She said we could not hold European elections. She moved the day of poll order for the European elections.
“I am sorry to say it, but the simple truth is we cannot trust a word she says.”
And that's from one of her own MP's!!
-
The not calling an election/calling an election thing I could understand. That's politics - you try to catch your opponent off guard. The rest of it shows that she has no concept of the strength or weakness of her hand, and is prepared to make unconvincing lie and promise after unconvincing lie and promise to get herself out of each tight spot, regardless of whether it just makes things even harder in the long run.
I had her number back in late 2017, when the first major negotiation deadline came and this was agreed.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-42277040
She agreed to no border in Ireland
She agreed to a payment to the EU for things that we'd already signed up to.
And then.
She came back to London and got grilled by Tory backbenchers and said that she'd agreed nothing of the sort.
That was utterly astonishing. I'd never in all my life heard a PM so brazenly and openly lie about something that was so unequivocally established. It was obvious from that moment that she was a terrifyingly weak person.
I just hope to God that we don't have a genuinely existential problem while she is PM. One that requires the ability to threaten and bluff in a believable way. Because nothing she ever says can be believed by anyone.
-
Have you seen this Sydney? https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/tory-mps-are-freaking-out-in-the-tea-rooms-about-what-the
Just a small flavour of the article here to show how difficult 'negotiating' with Theresa May might be on a lack of trust basis:
there is anger at what is perceived at May’s ongoing dishonesty with Tory MPs and the general public...
“She told us she would not call an election. She called an election. She said no British prime minister could ever agree to a Northern Ireland-only backstop. She agreed to a Northern Ireland-only backstop.
“She told us no deal was better than a bad deal. She would rather do anything but no deal. She told us she had secured legally binding changes to the backstop. Her attorney general confirmed the legal risk was unchanged.
“She told us she would never join a customs union. She told Labour her deal is a customs union in all but name. She told us hundreds of times we would leave on March 29. She stopped us leaving on March 29.
“She told us she could was not prepared to delay Brexit beyond June 30. She agreed a delay to October. She said we could not hold European elections. She moved the day of poll order for the European elections.
“I am sorry to say it, but the simple truth is we cannot trust a word she says.”
And that's from one of her own MP's!!
Thanks Wilts, you'd now need a endless row of portaloos to hold all the meetings of the tory factions.
This article from Sunday Observer gives an account of labour's position and Donny gets a guernsey!
"The numbers don’t lie: Labour must back a people’s vote to win the next election''
''For a few Bennite nostalgics, the rationale for this hedging is ideological – an attempt to maintain their fantasy of a leftwing Brexit, or Lexit, in which we’d be free from the EU’s falsely ascribed neoliberalism. But for others, it is rooted in wholly reasonable concerns about how a pro-people’s vote agenda would affect Labour’s vote, especially in constituencies where a majority opted to leave. The claim of MPs such as John Mann in Bassetlaw or Caroline Flint in Don Valley is, in essence, that “working-class” Labour voters would abandon us if we were seen to block the 2016 referendum result, thus denying Labour power for generations to come.
It is a powerful, emotional argument, of course, especially in a party born out of the working class. But it is not an argument supported by engagement with the facts. The facts are quite clear and have been repeatedly reinforced by polling evidence and analysis, most recently in the work of Christina Pagel and Christabel Cooper in research funded by University College London. Their polling of over 5,000 people shows that, on average, about two-thirds of Labour voters across the UK voted remain in 2016, ranging from 74% in London to 66% in Scotland and 59% in the Midlands''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/15/numbers-labour-back-peoples-vote-election-party
-
''How May miscalculated the Brexit numbers game''
''From calling a snap election to offering to step down, the prime minister has not only lost but failed to win support for her deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/16/how-may-miscalculated-the-brexit-numbers-game
-
Because Brexit hasn't dominated the news agenda, it has given me a chance to think about it. I really think the Hard Brexiteers in the ERG and the DUP are the best allies that Continuity Remain could ever have.
It's their unwillingness to play the long game that gets me. It's been obvious since the end of 2017 that the only way to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland is to be in a Customs Union and also the Single Market. That's the sort of Brexit I could happily live with.
However, why does that have to be permanent? In ten years time there may be a Border Poll in Northern Ireland and because of demographics the vote may go for a United Ireland. At that point Great Britain could choose to exit the SM and CU and negotiate just the sort of Canada-plus relationship with the EU that the ERG seem to hanker after.
It's odd, because previous generations of Eurosceptics WERE prepared to play the long game. Brexit has really been an issue since we signed up to Maastricht. It took 14 years to get a referendum. Unfortunately now they are not prepared to wait a bit longer to achieve Nirvana.
-
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrP4k8_Y7dc4XcA6pp0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTEzOGxxczhvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDTU9VSzAxXzEEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1555551168/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2fbusiness%2f2019%2f04%2f15%2fcorbyn-no-10-would-just-bad-banks-no-deal-brexit-citi-warns%2f/RK=2/RS=guxgNMMCalMM60G_x6ZUg1IoagM-
-
TRB
I keep banging on about this but it doesn't seem.to be sinking in.
It is not about Europe! It's about taking over the Tory party and moving the polical agenda to the Right.
See it through that lens and EVERYTHING that the ERG has done makes perfect sense.
-
TRB
I keep banging on about this but it doesn't seem.to be sinking in.
It is not about Europe! It's about taking over the Tory party and moving the polical agenda to the Right.
See it through that lens and EVERYTHING that the ERG has done makes perfect sense.
If that's the case all the ERG will inherit is ashes. The Tories will forever be remembered as the party that failed to deliver Brexit. I can't see them winning another election in their current form. Moving to the Right is unlikely to make them more appealing.
I suppose one plus from the fragmentation of politics is that it makes PR more rather than less likely.
-
TRB
But they have the Tea Party in America as an example. The caused havoc in the Republican party and opened the door for a venal, amoral, traitorous criminal to get to the White House. So anything is possible.
And, of course, if we continue to allow a combination of Big Money, right wing politicians and social media manipulators to screw with our minds in elections...
-
Female Labour councillor told she is a traitor and should be hung before being physically assuted whilst out campaining.
https://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/female-councillor-on-yarmouth-campaign-trail-punched-1-6002679
What's this about the country not moving to the right again?
-
TRB
But they have the Tea Party in America as an example. The caused havoc in the Republican party and opened the door for a venal, amoral, traitorous criminal to get to the White House. So anything is possible.
And, of course, if we continue to allow a combination of Big Money, right wing politicians and social media manipulators to screw with our minds in elections...
I just can't see someone like Trump getting in as PM here. Our system is different to the USA. Everyone thinks of BoJo, but he'd never get to the final two in a Tory leadership contest.
I do think a wager on Corbyn to be the next PM might pay, although he'll probably be leader of a Grand Coalition or National Government.
-
TRB
I think you're underestimating the degree of batshittery on the Tory back benches.
157 of them voted for No Deal 3 weeks back.
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/03/the-94-conservative-mps-who-voted-against-no-deal.html
Johnson would likely only need 100 of them to get into the top two and go into the Tory membership vote. To be honest, I can't see him not getting that many supporters from that list of swivel-eyed flat-earthers.
That's why the bookies have Johnson as clear favourite to replace May.
So,there you go. THAT is the strategy of the ERG. Use the chaos and resentment of Brexit to put into No10 a populist who believes in nothing but power, but who will be controlled by the far-Right of the Tory party.
It's happening. Right under your nose.
-
Other flat-earthers are available, of course.
With Johnson I don't think the issue is political. It's more a question that a lot of Tory MPs don't trust him. My view is if he couldn't win the MPs vote in 2016, when he'd played a leading role in the Leave campaign and his stock was high, then he's got little chance now.
If I was to put a bet on a Tory Brexiteer, my money would be on Dominic Raab.
-
Christ help us if a man who didn't realise the significance of the Calais crossing gets the keys to No. 10.
-
Sweet God up a-f**king-bove. We're in an era of political lightweights. Raab is not even a featherweight.
I'm fascinated TRB. What makes you see him as PM material?
-
Sweet God up a-f**king-bove. We're in an era of political lightweights. Raab is not even a featherweight.
I'm fascinated TRB. What makes you see him as PM material?
He's no heavyweight, but he's a Brexiteer and is telegenic. He also doesn't carry around the sort of baggage that Johnson and Gove do. Those three will throw their hats in the ring when the contest comes, but I expect Raab to be last man standing, simply because he's not the other two.
He'll go up against Jeremy Hunt, who ought to win because he's more experienced and is actually a smart politician (please ignore his views, I'm talking about political nous). However the electorate (Tory Party members) will never forgive him for (a) being a Cameroon and (b) voting Remain.
Raab will be next Tory leader. I had previously thought Javid would be, but I understand he has little support amongst MPs or in the National party.
Whether Raab becomes PM or Leader of the Opposition probably depends on the timing of May's departure. If she's removed before the end of June, PM. Otherwise, LoTO.
-
Is that all you need now TRB.
To look reasonable and be a member of the death cult.
-
Sweet God up a-f**king-bove. We're in an era of political lightweights. Raab is not even a featherweight.
I'm fascinated TRB. What makes you see him as PM material?
He's no heavyweight, but he's a Brexiteer and is telegenic. He also doesn't carry around the sort of baggage that Johnson and Gove do. Those three will throw their hats in the ring when the contest comes, but I expect Raab to be last man standing, simply because he's not the other two.
He'll go up against Jeremy Hunt, who ought to win because he's more experienced and is actually a smart politician (please ignore his views, I'm talking about political nous). However the electorate (Tory Party members) will never forgive him for (a) being a Cameroon and (b) voting Remain.
Raab will be next Tory leader. I had previously thought Javid would be, but I understand he has little support amongst MPs or in the National party.
Whether Raab becomes PM or Leader of the Opposition probably depends on the timing of May's departure. If she's removed before the end of June, PM. Otherwise, LoTO.
Any new leader of the Tories can be just as easily be Leader Of The Opposition without the need for a General Election, depending on how many Tory MPs quit the party when they become leader!
-
Christ help us if a man who didn't realise the significance of the Calais crossing gets the keys to No. 10.
God what a muppet he would be / IS
To be fair he KNEW we had a crossing Dover to Calais just not the fact that a staggering amount of our imports and exports to/from Europe come that way
Send for Grayling he / she would not let us down. Not this one anyway - the other Muppet would as he has repaeatedly proved. He would not be that bad as a Ref tbh
-
Fascinating poll in the Sunday Mail today. While Johnston is a clear favourite for the leadership in second place is Nigel Farage.
That's todays conservative party membership for you...
-
Wilts.
That's kind of the point I've been making for a year.
-
"Facebook ads by Lynton Crosby's firm 'part of push for hard Brexit"
"A network of secretive pro-Brexit Facebook campaigns overseen by Sir Lynton Crosby’s company CTF Partners was part of a wider campaign to undermine Theresa May and push Britain towards a hard Brexit, according to individuals with knowledge of the company’s operations and internal documents.
On Tuesday the information commissioner will answer questions in parliament about the network of Facebook campaigns through which seemingly independent pro-Brexit groups spent as much as £1m running online adverts promoting a hard Brexit on sites with names such as Britain’s Future and Mainstream Network"
"Crosby, an Australian political strategist and longtime confidant of Boris Johnson who played a role in convincing the former foreign secretary to back Brexit, received a knighthood for his work for the Conservatives in the 2015 general election. However, his reputation took a battering after returning for Theresa May’s disastrous 2017 election, prompting speculation he is positioning his company to benefit from placing Johnson in Downing Street – with the possibility that CTF could contribute resources if Johnson’s leadership campaign goes to a final vote"
Never mind taking back control this is out of control, that a covert operation can target susceptible people and dupe them into supporting a position that will harm them and their country greatly without their knowledge without the knowledge of the government?
-
Well that was a complete waste of money if the only objective was to undermine Theresa May - a policy she has proved more than capable of carrying out herself!
-
Christ on a penny-farthing, it's turning into a bad sitcom.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-48034732
Ann Widdecombe. A politician who spent her entire career trying to pretend the 20th century didn't happen.
Most failed old-folk have the decency to just shout at clouds. That generation is determined to drag the country back to some pre-War farce before they finally shuffle off.
-
Christ on a penny-farthing, it's turning into a bad sitcom.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-48034732
Ann Widdecombe. A politician who spent her entire career trying to pretend the 20th century didn't happen.
Most failed old-folk have the decency to just shout at clouds. That generation is determined to drag the country back to some pre-War farce before they finally shuffle off.
Still on with the bigoted, ageist drivel I see bst.
-
Not at all. I have boundless respect for many old people and I plan to be a respectable old person myself before too long. .
What I don't have respect for is old bigoted failures whose opinions belong back in the 1920s and who are trying to drag us back to that era.
It's not difficult to understand really.
-
By the way BS, you, being a libertarian, I assume will dislike Widdecombe as much as I do, given her opinions on social matters, no?
-
That wasn't my point, I was merely calling you out on your ageist views, and using Widdecombes age as a method to attack her.
I'm in no way defending or criticising her.
-
I wasn't attacking Widdecombe because of her age.
I was commenting on her age and inferring from that that her primary career (which was an unmitigated failure) is a long way behind her.
I was attacking her for her ideas. And suggesting that, since her ideas are both hopelessly out of date, and a major reason why she failed in her career, she'd be better advised to keep them to herself rather than drag herself out of well-earned retirement to foist them in us once again.
Just to re-iterate (because it seemed bleeding obvious to me, but clearly isn't to you) I have nothing against people of any age. What I WON'T respect is an older person who clings onto hopelessly outdated ideas and resents a world that has by-passed them. That's where the "shouting at clouds" comment comes from. It's about the attitude of simply moaning about everything.
-
Come on.
You just used Widdecombe as a proxy to casually malign "that generation" of people.
For what? Presumably for having the temerity to reject your view of the EU, amongst other things, in significant numbers "before they finally shuffle off" (really classy by the way).
You don't consider that to be an ageist insult at all?
-
Pilskin
Perfectly fair points and, on re-reading, that's not a well-written post of mine.
What I SHOULD have said was "People of that generation like her, who have fought tooth and nail against the social advances of the second half of the Twentieth century are determined to drag us back to a pre-War farce before they shuffle off."
(NB. "shuffle off" being something that we will all do one day, and a term that was first used by our national Bard. Would you say he was being "classy" when he coined that term?)
I'll repeat. I do NOT despise old people. I'm going to be one myself one day. And I've known and admired many who, not only have put a superb shift in over their lifetimes, but they accept that the younger generations inherit the world, and they use their experience and wisdom to help guide and educate them.
But I DO despise bigoted old people (or people of any age) who hate the modern world and want to impose their antediluvian obsessions on people who will have to deal with the shit they've left after they've gone. Like Widdecombe.
-
Pilskin
Perfectly fair points and, on re-reading, that's not a well-written post of mine.
What I SHOULD have said was "People of that generation like her, who have fought tooth and nail against the social advances of the second half of the Twentieth century are determined to drag us back to a pre-War farce before they shuffle off."
(NB. "shuffle off" being something that we will all do one day, and a term that was first used by our national Bard. Would you say he was being "classy" when he coined that term?)
I'll repeat. I do NOT despise old people. I'm going to be one myself one day. And I've known and admired many who, not only have put a superb shift in over their lifetimes, but they accept that the younger generations inherit the world, and they use their experience and wisdom to help guide and educate them.
But I DO despise bigoted old people (or people of any age) who hate the modern world and want to impose their antediluvian obsessions on people who will have to deal with the shit they've left after they've gone. Like Widdecombe.
It depends on what part of the modern world we're talking about Billy. Advances in science and technology have been fantastic, as has the stance against racism and homophobia, the reduction in carbon emissions, and the smoking ban.
However that's been offset by shootings, stabbings, violent women, no cops on the streets, alcoholism and drugs.
Also Billy, you seem to be a guy with good musical tastes, so surely you don't see (c)rap music as an advancement on 60s, 70s, and 80s music.
-
I got my polling card for the EU Parliament elections today and should get my ballot paper (by post) next week. I shall feel very short-changed if May and Corbyn cook up some Brexit Fudge which gets through Parliament after I've voted but before election day.
-
In Political Shock of the Day (predicted by a few on here 4 months back) I see Chris Grayling has today agreed to give £50m of your and my money to two foreign companies for doing precisely f**k all.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48117366
But it's alright. This was just 1% of the money the Government spent on planning for something that was never going to happen.
Grayling says that £4bn was an insurance policy against the worst problems that would have hit us in the event of No Deal. Like that makes it all ok.
Just stop and think about that.
How many of you spend large sums on insuring against losing your senses and punching yourself in the face until you are unconscious?
-
Local election results:
https://mobile.twitter.com/lancewalton/status/1124108139836649472
"If MPs can't interpret:
Leave parties: Labour (-32), Con (-39), UKIP (-11) : total -82
Remain parties: Lib Dems (+35), Green (+7) : total +42
then they're too stupid to be MPs."
Updated results: Conservatives: 1219 (-396)
🔽 Labour: 899 (-81)
🔼 Lib Dems: 521 (+271)
🔼 Greens: 42 (+36)
🔽 UKIP: 17 (-54)
🔼 Others: 358 (+224)
What's all this about democracy and that, then?
-
MM
Well the Today programme on R4 interview Labour councillors from Sunderland and Barnsley who insisted that Labour was losing seats to the Lads and Green because it wasn't supporting Brexit.
Granted, they didn't sound like the sharpest knives in the cutlery drawer.
-
Seats are not representative though are they. If the numbers move lab, con to other then often the libs etc gain from not gaining much.
Equally the turnout is so poor it doesn't tell us what would happen in a gen election etc.
What is surprising to me is how poor labour have done. I would have thought they would have gained a lot but they haven't as yet. I suspect the patterns aren't uniform either and labours problem is probably being middle of the road....
-
BFYP
Labour's performance isn't that much of a surprise.
These seats were last contested on the day of the 2015 GE. In that GE, Labour polled 30.4% of the vote. In recent opinion polls, Labour are on low 30s%. But yesterday's elections didn't include London, which is a Labour stronghold. So, assuming the polls are broadly correct, you'd probably expect Labour to do about as well as they did in 2015 in these council elections. Which is about what they are doing.
Why they are not doing much better against the most calamitous Govt in well over a century is the key question.
-
MM
Well the Today programme on R4 interview Labour councillors from Sunderland and Barnsley who insisted that Labour was losing seats to the Lads and Green because it wasn't supporting Brexit.
Granted, they didn't sound like the sharpest knives in the cutlery drawer.
However, if you are still strongly pro-Leave, as voters often are in the areas you mention, what incentive is there to vote Labour or Conservative?
By the same token, if you've strongly pro-Remain, the same applies.
In a lot of Wards the only opposition to the "Big Two" is the Lib Dems and/ or the Greens. UKIP don't have much strength on the ground now.
So yes, paradoxically pro-Leave voters may be delivering a protest vote by voting for pro-Remain parties.
-
That's a bizarre extrapolation TRB.
I'm struggling to see how on earth a Leave voter is registering a protest vote by voting for unambiguously pro-Remain parties.
It's almost like you're suggesting that Leave voters aren't very bright.
-
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-05-03/why-was-labour-punished-in-local-elections/
-
Pilskin
"shuffle off" being something that we will all do one day, and a term that was first used by our national Bard. Would you say he was being "classy" when he coined that term?
I agree Jim Bob from Carter the Unstoppable Sex Machine should be regarded as our National Bard.
"Well I remember Micky Doyle, he just shuffled off this mortal coil" - Every time a Church Bell Rings. Lovely song
-
That's a bizarre extrapolation TRB.
I'm struggling to see how on earth a Leave voter is registering a protest vote by voting for unambiguously pro-Remain parties.
It's almost like you're suggesting that Leave voters aren't very bright.
On the other hand, they might be showing a high degree of sophistication.
We really wait to see when all the figures are in. Is it a case of voters just shunning the Tories, and Labour to a lesser degree, or are they actually flocking to the Lib Dems and Greens.
-
There was a fair sized campaign online to get people to vote Lib Dem and Green to show their feeling on Brexit as Labour are increasingly seen (unsurprisingly) as a Brexit party too.
-
There was a fair sized campaign online to get people to vote Lib Dem and Green to show their feeling on Brexit as Labour are increasingly seen (unsurprisingly) as a Brexit party too.
That was one of my points. If you are pro-Remain, and especially if you want a Second Referendum, there's no reason for you to vote Labour, either in these elections or the EU ones.
-
If there was a GE now the result would be brilliant. No chance anyone would get a majority.
-
If there was a GE now the result would be brilliant. No chance anyone would get a majority.
I think these elections and the EU ones will probably put to bed any idea that a General Election might break the Brexit logjam.
-
If there was a GE now the result would be brilliant. No chance anyone would get a majority.
I think these elections and the EU ones will probably put to bed any idea that a General Election might break the Brexit logjam.
I don't think it ever was going to. What everyone needs is to get past Brexit and back on to moving forwards...
-
That's a bizarre extrapolation TRB.
I'm struggling to see how on earth a Leave voter is registering a protest vote by voting for unambiguously pro-Remain parties.
It's almost like you're suggesting that Leave voters aren't very bright.
On the other hand, they might be showing a high degree of sophistication.
We really wait to see when all the figures are in. Is it a case of voters just shunning the Tories, and Labour to a lesser degree, or are they actually flocking to the Lib Dems and Greens.
Surely, if Labour and the Tories are heamoraging votes to such a degree, it doesn't require anyone to flock to the other parties for those other parties to gain seats.
-
There was a fair sized campaign online to get people to vote Lib Dem and Green to show their feeling on Brexit as Labour are increasingly seen (unsurprisingly) as a Brexit party too.
That was one of my points. If you are pro-Remain, and especially if you want a Second Referendum, there's no reason for you to vote Labour, either in these elections or the EU ones.
Yep. I agree very much with that.
What I don't agree with is the insistence that Labour has been hammered because it's not supporting Leave.
-
Local election results:
https://mobile.twitter.com/lancewalton/status/1124108139836649472
"If MPs can't interpret:
Leave parties: Labour (-32), Con (-39), UKIP (-11) : total -82
Remain parties: Lib Dems (+35), Green (+7) : total +42
then they're too stupid to be MPs."
Updated results: Conservatives: 1219 (-396)
🔽 Labour: 899 (-81)
🔼 Lib Dems: 521 (+271)
🔼 Greens: 42 (+36)
🔽 UKIP: 17 (-54)
🔼 Others: 358 (+224)
What's all this about democracy and that, then?
Totally irrelevant. The Lib Dems always mop up when the 2 main parties are unpopular. If you want to see a real reaction to the Brexit situation, just wait until May 23rd.
-
Just bizarre how many folk are effectively saying that voters who think Lab and Con aren't delivering on Brexit are switching to parties that would overturn Brexit.
And it's odd isn't it. When I pointed out the established fact that Brexit supporters were disproportionately old and with low levels of educational qualification, I had a torrent of abuse for "insulting" Leave voters. But here we are, with people effectively saying that Leave voters are too thick to understand what parties stand for, or what a protest vote is, and there's not a flicker of complaint.
-
Now both big parties are stringing the line that people not voting for them is their way of telling them to 'get on with it'
Since when has being told to feck off equated to being told to 'get on with it'? :silly:
-
There was a fair sized campaign online to get people to vote Lib Dem and Green to show their feeling on Brexit as Labour are increasingly seen (unsurprisingly) as a Brexit party too.
That was one of my points. If you are pro-Remain, and especially if you want a Second Referendum, there's no reason for you to vote Labour, either in these elections or the EU ones.
Yep. I agree very much with that.
What I don't agree with is the insistence that Labour has been hammered because it's not supporting Leave.
I'm not going to make any assumptions or conclusions here BST, but here is (from around 2 hours ago) the areas where Labour lost councillors, and how those areas voted in the EU Referendum in 2016.
Allerdale: Lost 11. Voted to leave by 59%
Ashfield: Lost 20. Voted to leave by 70%
Barnsley: Lost 7. Voted to leave by 68%
Barrow-in-Furness: Lost 3. Voted to leave by 61%
Blackburn with Darwen: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 56%
Blackpool: Lost 6: Voted to leave by 68%
Bolsover: Lost 14. Voted to leave by 71%
Bolton: Lost 7. Voted to leave by 58%
Brighton and Hove: Lost 3. Voted to remain by 68%
Bromsgrove: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 55%
Burnley: Lost 4. Voted to leave by 67%
Bury: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 54%
Cannock Chase: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 67%
Carlisle: Lost 6. Voted to leave by 60%
Central Bedfordshire: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 56%
Chesterfield: Lost 10. Voted to leave by 60%
Dacorum: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 51%
Darlington: Lost 9. Voted to leave by 56%
Derby: Lost 6. Voted to leave by 57%
Dover: Lost 1. Voted to Leave by 62%
East Riding of Yorkshire: Lost 6. Voted to Leave by 60%
East Staffordshire: Lost 2. Voted to Leave by 63%
East Suffolk: Lost 4. Voted to leave by 53%
Exeter: Lost 1. Voted to remain by 55%
Forest of Dean: Lost 6. Voted to leave by 59%
Fylde: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 57%
Gateshead: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 57%
Halton: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 57%
Hartlepool: Lost 5. Voted to leave by 70%
Kirklees: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 55%
Knowsley: Lost 3. Voted to Leave by 52%
Leeds: Lost 3. Voted remain by 50.3%
Liverpool: Lost 3. Voted remain by 58%
Luton: Lost 3. Voted leave by 57%
Manchester: Lost 1. Voted remain by 60%
Middlesbrough: Lost 13. Voted to leave by 67%
Newark and Sherwood: Lost 5. Voted to leave by 60%
Newcastle: Lost 2. Voted to remain by 51%
North East Derbyshire: Lost 17. Voted to leave by 63%
North East Lincolnshire: lost 6. Voted to leave by 70%
North Lincolnshire: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 66%
North Tyneside: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 53%
Norwich: Lost 4. Voted remain by 56%
Nottingham: Lost 3. Voted leave by 51%
Oldham: Lost 1. Voted leave by 61%
Pendle: Lost 1. Voted leave by 63%
Redcar & Cleveland: Lost 13. Voted to leave by 66%
Redditch: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 62%
Rhibble Valley: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 56%
Rossendale: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 61%
Salford: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 57%
Scarborough: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 62%
Sevenoaks: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 54%
Sheffield: Lost 3. Voted to leave by 51%
South Gloucestershire: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 53%
South Hams: Lost 1. Voted Remain by 53%
South Staffordshire: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 65%
South Tyneside: Lost 5. Voted to leave by 62%
St Helens: Lost 4. Voted to leave by 58%
Stockton On Tees: Lost 8. Voted to leave by 62%
Stoke-On-Trent: Lost 5. Voted to leave by 69%
Stratford-upon-Avon: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 52%
Sunderland: Lost 12. Voted to leave by 61%
Swindon: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 55%
Tamworth: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 68%
Wakefield: Lost 3. Voted to leave by 66%
Walsall: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 68%
Warwick: Lost 3. Voted to remain by 59%
Welwyn Hatfield: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 53%
West Devon: Lost 2. Voted to leave by 53%
West Lancashire: Lost 4. Voted to leave by 55%
West Lindsey: Lost 4. Voted to leave by 62%
Wigan: Lost 3. Voted to leave by 64%
Wirral: Lost 4. Voted to remain by 52%
Wolverhampton: Lost 1. Voted to leave by 63%
Wyre: Lost 5. Voted to leave by 64%
Wyre Forest: Lost 3. Voted to leave by 63%
Results of EU Referendum taken from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results/local/b
Results of local elections taken from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/ceeqy0e9894t/england-local-elections-2019
-
Now both big parties are stringing the line that people not voting for them is their way of telling them to 'get on with it'
Since when has being told to feck off equated to being told to 'get on with it'? :silly:
It's the Zeitgeist. Policy-based evidence making, instead of evidence-based policy making.
It's been creeping in for years but it rules the roost on all sides these days.
You decide what you belief and you hammer the evidence until it fits into that mould.
Corbyn wants Brexit. Always has and he always will. Therefore the facts SHALL show that Labour voters want Brexit.
Crofty here, although he's not making any conclusions, is in danger of running down the same ideologically convinced rabbit hole by presenting data with a very particular slant.
Crofty.
1) That evidence says nothing about what LABOUR voters voted in 2016. It says only what the Leave vote was in the areas in total.
2) Who have Labour lost seats to today? There's been a UKIP candidate in pretty much every one that Labour lost. How many did they pick up? And how many were lost to the LDs and Greens?
Excellent research Crofty by the way. You've got more patience than me to put that together. But it would be more informative to also look at areas where Labour gained seats this time (e.g. Calderdale, +4, 55.7% Leave: Plymouth, +1, 59.9% Leave: Peterborough, +3, 60.9% Leave...I haven't got your patience but there are a good few more).
And, critically, you need to look at who the lost Labour votes have gone to. Sunderland seems to be the poster town for Left Leave these days. Yesterday, Labour's vote was down 17%. But UKIP was only up 4.5%. whereas the Lads were up 10% and the Greens up 8.5%.
Unless you subscribe to SS's view that Leave voters are to thick or idle to know how to register a protest vote (and therefore voted LD when they could have voted UKIP) that looks to me like Labour losing more Remain supporters than Leave supporters.
-
Actual Evidence: A majority of voters in a large number of Labour-supporting areas voted Leave in 2016.
Desired Policy: Brexit
Policy-Based Evidence Making: A majority of LABOUR voters in a large number of constituencies are Brexit supporters today.
Actual Evidence: Labour today lost seats. Predominantly to the LDs and Greens. Labour lost very few seats to the key Brexit-supporting party fighting these elections.
Desired Policy: Brexit.
Policy-Based Evidence Making: Labour lost seats today because it is not unequivocally backing Brexit.
-
Now both big parties are stringing the line that people not voting for them is their way of telling them to 'get on with it'
Since when has being told to feck off equated to being told to 'get on with it'? :silly:
It's the Zeitgeist. Policy-based evidence making, instead of evidence-based policy making.
It's been creeping in for years but it rules the roost on all sides these days.
You decide what you belief and you hammer the evidence until it fits into that mould.
Corbyn wants Brexit. Always has and he always will. Therefore the facts SHALL show that Labour voters want Brexit.
Crofty here, although he's not making any conclusions, is in danger of running down the same ideologically convinced rabbit hole by presenting data with a very particular slant.
Crofty.
1) That evidence says nothing about what LABOUR voters voted in 2016. It says only what the Leave vote was in the areas in total.
2) Who have Labour lost seats to today? There's been a UKIP candidate in pretty much every one that Labour lost. How many did they pick up? And how many were lost to the LDs and Greens?
Excellent research Crofty by the way. You've got more patience than me to put that together. But it would be more informative to also look at areas where Labour gained seats this time (e.g. Calderdale, +4, 55.7% Leave: Plymouth, +1, 59.9% Leave: Peterborough, +3, 60.9% Leave...I haven't got your patience but there are a good few more).
And, critically, you need to look at who the lost Labour votes have gone to. Sunderland seems to be the poster town for Left Leave these days. Yesterday, Labour's vote was down 17%. But UKIP was only up 4.5%. whereas the Lads were up 10% and the Greens up 8.5%.
Unless you subscribe to SS's view that Leave voters are to thick or idle to know how to register a protest vote (and therefore voted LD when they could have voted UKIP) that looks to me like Labour losing more Remain supporters than Leave supporters.
You're not getting it Billy; nobody's interested in UKIP anymore, they're a spent force. As I said in the other thread, the Brexit Party didn't stand, but they'll be standing on May 23rd. Wait for it.
-
Aye SS.
They'll get 25-30%. Built on a campaign funded by Putin.
It'll f**k the Tory party from top to bottom. But that'll be the limit of them.
What are you wanting? A party like that, bankrolled by the Kremlin to take over?
-
The Beast of Bolsover ousted.
Labour’s dominance in Bolsover – so strong that its famed veteran MP and lifelong Eurosceptic, Dennis Skinner, was nicknamed the beast of Bolsover – was well and truly overthrown on Thursday night. In the old Derbyshire mining town, a Labour stronghold for 40 years, the party suffered one of the biggest defeats in its history, losing control of the local district council for the first time since its inception.
The victorious were those who stood as independents, signalling a new era for British politics. On Friday afternoon, as ballot papers were furiously being sifted through for the parish councils, Ross Walker – a newly elected independent councillor – became visibly emotional.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/03/labour-loses-control-of-bolsover-for-first-time-in-its-40-year-history
-
Skinner, of course, being one of the most outspoken Labour Leave supporters.
-
Ive just seen Hancock and an amazingly stupid (imo) summary of what people wanted fro the Local Elections
Not one person on any doorstep he visited said "actually I wanted a slightly different B****t" " I wanted a tweak to Clause 5" " I wanted a slightly different approach to blah blah" (I had lost interest by then) NO he said everyone just said please please just get on with it
I am sick and tired of people like him telling media what I want. He doesnt have a clue what I or the majority of people want.
-
I agree wholeheartedly John. How can he assume that everybody voted for a hard or stupid Brexit.
-
Caution needs to be taken in drawing conclusions based on local election results for national trends.
Many local elections are influenced by particular local considerations, which are not understood outside the area.
That said, IF it carries through, the revival of the Lib Dems in areas where they are the Tory challengers is important. It means the Tories are squeezed on both sides by voters who would not consider Labour.
The most important thing for Labour going into any GE is that the Tories lose seats where a viable contender is in touching distance.
Interesting times!
-
Interesting chart that shows a clear Leave/Remain effect for both Labour & the Tories. Labour did worse in the areas that had a greater leave vote and the Tories did worse the greater the remain vote.
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1124404593524453379
-
Don’t no what the turn out was in most places but I don’t know 1 person that voted, many of them say they will in the European elections thou so will see if there is a biggger than normal turnout
-
Me and the wife did but Labour got in anyway. They aren’t a patch on the Lib Dem’s in Bradford.
-
“b*llocks to Brexit.”
Go the Lib Dems, if JC can't get his head around remain there is a party that can.
Vince Cable has staked the Liberal Democrats’ claim to be the leading remain party in the European elections, as he unveiled a forthright new slogan for the campaign: “b*llocks to Brexit.”
The phrase, previously plastered on stickers and T-shirts by ardent remain supporters, is now emblazoned across the Lib Dem manifesto for the 23 May poll – though more squeamish candidates will have the option of one that just says “Stop Brexit”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/09/vince-cable-stakes-lib-dems-claim-as-torch-carriers-for-remain
-
“b*llocks to Brexit.”
Go the Lib Dems, if JC can't get his head around remain there is a party that can.
Vince Cable has staked the Liberal Democrats’ claim to be the leading remain party in the European elections, as he unveiled a forthright new slogan for the campaign: “b*llocks to Brexit.”
The phrase, previously plastered on stickers and T-shirts by ardent remain supporters, is now emblazoned across the Lib Dem manifesto for the 23 May poll – though more squeamish candidates will have the option of one that just says “Stop Brexit”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/09/vince-cable-stakes-lib-dems-claim-as-torch-carriers-for-remain
Thanks for that Sydney; that slogan just sums you lot up perfectly.
Roll on May 23rd.
-
I never really saw Vince Cable as a Johnny Rotten figure.
-
I never really saw Vince Cable as a Johnny Rotten figure.
Never mind. 😉
-
“b*llocks to Brexit.”
Go the Lib Dems, if JC can't get his head around remain there is a party that can.
Vince Cable has staked the Liberal Democrats’ claim to be the leading remain party in the European elections, as he unveiled a forthright new slogan for the campaign: “b*llocks to Brexit.”
The phrase, previously plastered on stickers and T-shirts by ardent remain supporters, is now emblazoned across the Lib Dem manifesto for the 23 May poll – though more squeamish candidates will have the option of one that just says “Stop Brexit”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/09/vince-cable-stakes-lib-dems-claim-as-torch-carriers-for-remain
That's a bit vicious, Sydney.
-
Surely it's the Tories wanting to Sell England by the pound.
-
Surely it's the Tories wanting to Sell England by the pound.
Thats the Genesis of it yes...
-
I never really saw Vince Cable as a Johnny Rotten figure.
Never mind. 😉
On a similar theme, what will they call the next General Election manifesto? "Never Mind The B***ocks, Here's The Lib Dems." As a proud owner of the Pistols album, I remember there was a lot of Lib. Dem yellow on the cover, so it wouldn't need a massive redesign.
-
Surely it's the Tories wanting to Sell England by the pound.
Give 'Em Enough Rope or we're all Damned Damned Damned.
-
Straight to Hell?
Ever Fallen in Love with a Brexit You Shouldn't Have Fallen In Love With?
It's (not) Gonna Happen?
By the way, I strongly recommend this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0004vyd/storyville-brexit-behind-closed-doors-part-1
Eye-opening, informative and (as someone who is proud to be British) shaming.
-
“b*llocks to Brexit.”
Go the Lib Dems, if JC can't get his head around remain there is a party that can.
Vince Cable has staked the Liberal Democrats’ claim to be the leading remain party in the European elections, as he unveiled a forthright new slogan for the campaign: “b*llocks to Brexit.”
The phrase, previously plastered on stickers and T-shirts by ardent remain supporters, is now emblazoned across the Lib Dem manifesto for the 23 May poll – though more squeamish candidates will have the option of one that just says “Stop Brexit”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/09/vince-cable-stakes-lib-dems-claim-as-torch-carriers-for-remain
Thanks for that Sydney; that slogan just sums you lot up perfectly.
Roll on May 23rd.
Sorry Steve, I wouldn't ''roll on May'' even if your life depended on it!
-
Tell you what. You've got to hand it to May. Having a poll rating of 8% when folk were asked if they approved of her handling of the Brexit negotiations is something exceptional.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/do-you-approve-or-disapprove-of-the-way-in-which-the-government-is-handling-the-brexit-negotiations/
How can you do that? How can you be so shit at handling THE most important job you've got, that 92% of the population agree that you're shit?
This is how. You can ride off into the negotiations framing yourself as Boudicea, shouting the odds and telling the country how great Brexit will be, while all the time having not a single card to play, and no support from Parliament.
I honestly did not believe this great country of ours could ever be ruled by such a blundering incompetent as this. It is harrowing to watch.
-
oh I wouldn't worry Billy...Corbyn might get in soon then you can really sit down with the popcorn..
-
Interesting the remain parties were talking about standing a united remain candidate in some areas but guess what, it seems they couldn't even agree on that...
-
Straight to Hell?
Ever Fallen in Love with a Brexit You Shouldn't Have Fallen In Love With?
It's (not) Gonna Happen?
By the way, I strongly recommend this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0004vyd/storyville-brexit-behind-closed-doors-part-1
Eye-opening, informative and (as someone who is proud to be British) shaming.
Surely the ultimate Brexit soundtrack is Hotel California by The Eagles.
"You can check out any time you like, but you can never Leave."
-
Some bloke off the street manages to make Nidge squirm by confronting him with facts and not letting him bullshit his way around them. I wonder if many mainstream reporters will do the same?
https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1126609186178072577
-
Straight to Hell?
Ever Fallen in Love with a Brexit You Shouldn't Have Fallen In Love With?
It's (not) Gonna Happen?
By the way, I strongly recommend this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0004vyd/storyville-brexit-behind-closed-doors-part-1
Eye-opening, informative and (as someone who is proud to be British) shaming.
Surely the ultimate Brexit soundtrack is Hotel California by The Eagles.
"You can check out any time you like, but you can never Leave."
Au contraire.
You can check out any time you want but you might not get the leaving package that Nigel and Boris promised you.
I've never been an Eagles fan, but every time I see Farage, "You can't hide your lyin' eyes" plays in my head.
-
Straight to Hell?
Ever Fallen in Love with a Brexit You Shouldn't Have Fallen In Love With?
It's (not) Gonna Happen?
By the way, I strongly recommend this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0004vyd/storyville-brexit-behind-closed-doors-part-1
Eye-opening, informative and (as someone who is proud to be British) shaming.
Surely the ultimate Brexit soundtrack is Hotel California by The Eagles.
"You can check out any time you like, but you can never Leave."
Au contraire.
You can check out any time you want but you might not get the leaving package that Nigel and Boris promised you.
I've never been an Eagles fan, but every time I see Farage, "You can't hide your lyin' eyes" plays in my head.
Very good Billy, and probably very true, but tell me one single politician in the whole wide world who isn't a liar.
Honest people don't go into politics.
-
Billy's a bit of a Desperado these days.
-
SS
All politicians have to duck and dive and dissemble and evade. Because if they were 100% truthful all the time, they would get slaughtered. That is the fault of society that is too immature to deal with complexity and accept that all politicians have to compromise and can't please everyone all the time.
There are politicians that reflect every type of person, but if you genuinely, genuinely think that none of them are honest,then I despair.
The idea that has taken hold, that all politicians in this country are venal, self-serving liars is one of THE most dangerous threats to the country at the moment.
The reason is, that is enough people are jaundiced and assume that they are ALL lying bas**rds, the real lying bas**rds are let off the hook.
And that's precisely what's happened in recent years.
Farage is the poster boy for it in this country. Trump in America. They hurl abuse on ALL politicians and convince people that they are all liars. Then their own lies get buried.
Farage wrote the executive summary to the UKIP 2010 manifesto. He lead the launch of it. Then when people pointed out that it was utter batshit (they wanted to pass laws to make train companies paint their trains in pre-nationalisation colours, to make all taxi drivers have to wear uniforms, and to give millionaires tax cuts of greater than 20%) Farage sat across the table from an interviewer and said "I had nothing to do with that document."
After the 2016 vote, he said in an interview "I never said there'd be £350m/week for the NHS."
During the campaign, he frequently said we should have a relationship with the EU like Norway. After it, he said that a Norway deal would be a humiliation.
THAT is dishonesty. He does it week after week. Hiding in plain sight. Accepted, because folk like you lazily assume that they are all as bad.
-
Billy's a bit of a Desperado these days.
Going to be One of Those Nights is it?
-
Not if you come to your senses.
-
I bow to your better knowledge of the back catalogue of the fullest band in history.
Me?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D-JlmvtAHhnc&ved=2ahUKEwjxpOjUq5HiAhWaXRUIHe3eA5IQwqsBegQIAhAF&usg=AOvVaw3xPu1rThjkSpV1Z4FbETXC
-
SS
All politicians have to duck and dive and dissemble and evade. Because if they were 100% truthful all the time, they would get slaughtered. That is the fault of society that is too immature to deal with complexity and accept that all politicians have to compromise and can't please everyone all the time.
There are politicians that reflect every type of person, but if you genuinely, genuinely think that none of them are honest,then I despair.
The idea that has taken hold, that all politicians in this country are venal, self-serving liars is one of THE most dangerous threats to the country at the moment.
The reason is, that is enough people are jaundiced and assume that they are ALL lying bas**rds, the real lying bas**rds are let off the hook.
And that's precisely what's happened in recent years.
Farage is the poster boy for it in this country. Trump in America. They hurl abuse on ALL politicians and convince people that they are all liars. Then their own lies get buried.
Farage wrote the executive summary to the UKIP 2010 manifesto. He lead the launch of it. Then when people pointed out that it was utter batshit (they wanted to pass laws to make train companies paint their trains in pre-nationalisation colours, to make all taxi drivers have to wear uniforms, and to give millionaires tax cuts of greater than 20%) Farage sat across the table from an interviewer and said "I had nothing to do with that document."
After the 2016 vote, he said in an interview "I never said there'd be £350m/week for the NHS."
During the campaign, he frequently said we should have a relationship with the EU like Norway. After it, he said that a Norway deal would be a humiliation.
THAT is dishonesty. He does it week after week. Hiding in plain sight. Accepted, because folk like you lazily assume that they are all as bad.
And that honest, cuddly old guy Vince Cable introduced a foul-mouthed slogan that basically told 17.4 million people to f*ck off; but it's not true to say that all politicians are as bad as each other.
Either I'm being cynical here, or you're being naive. I think I know what most people would think.
-
SS.
we were talking about dishonesty. Is Cable being dishonest?
-
He might have connections.
-
SS.
we were talking about dishonesty. Is Cable being dishonest?
If he claims to be a democrat, and then promotes a slogan like that, that defies democracy in every possible way, then yes, he's being dishonest.
Go back and read the words on that slogan.
-
SS
I've read it. It wouldn't have been my choice of words. But describing g that as dishonest is a weird stretching of meaning. And I have no problem with anyone forcefully pointing out that Brexit is a massive mistake and that the Leave campaign was riddled with lies, claims that have been shown to be false and criminal activity. It's certainly enough to make ME swear.
-
SS
All politicians have to duck and dive and dissemble and evade. Because if they were 100% truthful all the time, they would get slaughtered. That is the fault of society that is too immature to deal with complexity and accept that all politicians have to compromise and can't please everyone all the time.
There are politicians that reflect every type of person, but if you genuinely, genuinely think that none of them are honest,then I despair.
The idea that has taken hold, that all politicians in this country are venal, self-serving liars is one of THE most dangerous threats to the country at the moment.
The reason is, that is enough people are jaundiced and assume that they are ALL lying bas**rds, the real lying bas**rds are let off the hook.
And that's precisely what's happened in recent years.
Farage is the poster boy for it in this country. Trump in America. They hurl abuse on ALL politicians and convince people that they are all liars. Then their own lies get buried.
Farage wrote the executive summary to the UKIP 2010 manifesto. He lead the launch of it. Then when people pointed out that it was utter batshit (they wanted to pass laws to make train companies paint their trains in pre-nationalisation colours, to make all taxi drivers have to wear uniforms, and to give millionaires tax cuts of greater than 20%) Farage sat across the table from an interviewer and said "I had nothing to do with that document."
After the 2016 vote, he said in an interview "I never said there'd be £350m/week for the NHS."
During the campaign, he frequently said we should have a relationship with the EU like Norway. After it, he said that a Norway deal would be a humiliation.
THAT is dishonesty. He does it week after week. Hiding in plain sight. Accepted, because folk like you lazily assume that they are all as bad.
And that honest, cuddly old guy Vince Cable introduced a foul-mouthed slogan that basically told 17.4 million people to f*ck off; but it's not true to say that all politicians are as bad as each other.
Either I'm being cynical here, or you're being naive. I think I know what most people would think.
And you have never used a similar or worse SS? sounds like a bit of faux indignation?
''One of the early references is Wycliffe's Bible (1382), Leviticus xxii, 24: "Al beeste, that ... kitt and taken awey the ballokes is, ye shulen not offre to the Lord ..." (any beast that is cut and taken away the b*llocks, you shall not offer to the Lord, i.e. castrated animals are not suitable as sacrifices)''
"b*llocks" /ˈbɒləks/ is a word of Middle English origin, meaning "testicles". The word is often used figuratively in colloquial British English and Hiberno-English as a noun to mean "nonsense", an expletive following a minor accident or misfortune, or an adjective to mean "poor quality" or "useless". Similarly, common phrases like "b*llocks to this!" and "That's a load of old b*llocks" generally indicate contempt for a certain task, subject or opinion. Conversely, the word also figures in idiomatic phrases such as "the dog's b*llocks" or more simply "the b*llocks" (as opposed to just "b*llocks"), which will refer to something which is admired, approved of or well-respected.[A]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/b*llocks
-
Can't argue with that Sidney. You're clearly better at talking b*llocks than I am.
-
Can't argue with that Sidney. You're clearly better at talking b*llocks than I am.
Too right BB you can't flaunt what you aint got.
-
If Theresa May can get away with it I'm sure I can.
-
Changing the subject slightly, I got my Postal Voting form today. On the ballot paper you can only vote for one party. I thought it was first and second preference?
It's certainly going to force those who want to vote for a committed Remain party to vote tactically. Change UK, the Greens and the Lib Dems are all standing. The pro-Leave vote can only really go one of two ways- the Brexit Party or UKIP.
West Midlands returns 7 MEPs. In 2014 there were three Kippers, two Tories and two Labour. I would think the three UKIP seats would go to Brexit, Labour and the Tories will hold one each. One Tory seat will probably go to the Lib Dems and Labour will either just hang on to the other seat or that will go to Brexit.
So, 3-4 Brexit, 1-2 Labour, 1 Tory, 1 LD.
-
PS. I have to say that despite the number of parties I'm minded to abstain or spoil my ballot. No-one is offering the kind of Brexit I would prefer, I.e. Norway-plus.
-
TRB
Strange isn't it? Farage was all over that sort of Brexit in 2016. I wonder what led to his honest and principled change of mind. Straight after the vote.
-
TRB
Strange isn't it? Farage was all over that sort of Brexit in 2016. I wonder what led to his honest and principled change of mind. Straight after the vote.
Mr. Putin or Mr. Trump presumably. Anyway, the lead candidate for the Brexit party in the West Midlands is Rupert Lowe, former chairman of Southampton FC and an ocean-going bell-end.
If Labour or the Tories came out for Norway-plus, I'd vote for them. But the Single Market is anathema to the Corbynites, who want to be able to nationalise anything that moves and a Customs Union is anathema to the Tories, who think we can get better trade deals outside the EU umbrella.
-
TRB
You're being far too understanding of Farage. He"changed his mind" because he's a lying shite. He never wanted a Norway style deal, but saying "Wouldn't it be great if we had a deal like Norway" enabled him to neutralise the argument that leaving the EU would be economically harmful.
He's an unprincipled, treacherous liar. It's horrifying how many people are blind to it.
-
TRB
You're being far too understanding of Farage. He"changed his mind" because he's a lying shite. He never wanted a Norway style deal, but saying "Wouldn't it be great if we had a deal like Norway" enabled him to neutralise the argument that leaving the EU would be economically harmful.
He's an unprincipled, treacherous liar. It's horrifying how many people are blind to it.
OK Billy; time for a reality check, especially as you seem to think that regarding ALL politicians as liars and cheats is just lazy thinking. Cast your mind back to 2010 when Nick Clegg and his cronies, including the wonderful Vince Cable, disgusted their supporters all over the country by getting into bed with the detestable Tory Party and reneging on their manifesto promises, none more so than the scrapping of student tuition fees. The fact that they took cushy well paid jobs in David Cameron's cabinet just made the whole thing even more sleazy.
These are the guys that you are portraying as whiter than white, and that the only bad guy in the mix is Nigel Farage. I think you'll find a lot of people disagreeing with you on May 23rd.
You're a very intelligent guy Billy, but there are times when your partisanship prevents you from looking at the bigger picture.
-
Fascinating poll data. Corbyns' strategy of compromise appears to be working in that Labour is the largest vote share for those who voted Remain in 2016 whilst also being 2nd choice for Leavers. No doubt who is 1st choice for Leavers tho.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1127265494468386816
-
Michael O’Leary, Chief Executive of Ryanair after arriving in a hotel in Manchester went to the bar and asked for a pint of Guinness.
The barman said, "That will be £1 please, Mr. O’Leary."
Taken aback, O'Leary replied, "That's very cheap," and handed over his money.
"We do try to stay ahead of the competition", said the barman. "We have the cheapest beer in England".
"That is remarkable value", Michael comments.
"I see you don't have a glass, you'll need one of ours. That will be £3 please."
O'Leary scowled, but paid up. He took his drink and walked towards a seat.
"Ah, you want to sit down?" said the barman. "That'll be an extra £2. If you'd pre-booked it would have cost £1."
O'Leary swore to himself, but paid up.
"I see you've brought your laptop" added the barman. "That wasn't pre-booked either, that's another £3."
O'Leary was so incensed and his face was red with rage.
"I've had enough! I insist on speaking to a manager!"
"Here is his e-mail address, or if you wish, you can contact him between 9.00 am and 9.01am every morning, Monday to Tuesday. Calls are free, unless answered, then there is a charge of only £1 per second".
"I will never use this bar again".
"OK but do remember, we are the only hotel in England selling pints for £1."
Let's get out of that f**king corrupt club.
-
Right.
I've just watched 2001: A Space Odyssey with the kids. They've just seen the most incomprehensible final 20 minutes of any film in history.
And that was easy to absorb compared to trying to figure out what the f**king hell BS is on about.
-
SS
You might want to have a look back through the archives and see what I was saying about the LDs in 2010.
I'll Precis it for you. I said that the LDs, renegeing on their key policies to climb I to bed with the Tories was the greatest con of voters in a century. I said it would make them unelectable as a serious contender for a generation, and deservedly so.
I was correct. Their supporters left them in droves.
But. There is a very important aspect to this. The LDs changed policy because they (wrongly) convinced themselves that they had to compromise to make sure we had a stable coalition Govt to bring us out of the Great Recession. They didn't lie to the electorate about what they believed before the election in 2010. They campaigned passionately for what they believed in. They then made a very difficult realpolitik decision, and made the wrong decision, demonstrably because it all but destroyed them.
Farage is a totally different case. He never backed a Norway style deal. But he used Norway as an example time and time again in 2016. Because Norway is a rich country outside the EU. So that gave the impression that we could be rich-ER outside the EU.
He never believed that. Not for a moment. He wanted and wants us out of the EU and not tied in to its institutions (like Norway is) at all. Which is why he NOW says that anyone supporting a Norway style deal (which I would, reluctantly) is betraying the vote.
THAT is what an unprincipled liar does. But the irony is that when HE does it the idiots who support him think even more of him.
I don't doubt that millions are going to vote for him the week after next. What I doubt is their ability (or willingness) to see his deception for the frightening thing that it is.
Sleepwalking into a f**king nightmare.
-
Wilts.
If Labour being in 21% in that poll is evidence of Corbyn being right, I hope to God he's never wrong.
Sorry. Silly me. The possibility of him being wrong doesn't exist, does it?
-
Thing is Billy, Farage has gone far beyond a third division off-topic football forum to put his case across and seems to have convinced a vast amount of voters. I'm sure he isn't aware of your potentially libellous accusations against him because I'm sure he has bigger fish to fry.
If you don't think that is the case, and you want to express your hatred of him somewhere where he might hear you, why don't you? That way your view might make more than an iota of difference.
-
BB
You think I don't?
Potentially libellous my arse. Everything I've ever said about him, here and elsewhere is supported by facts. Evidence of what himself has said, or of what others have proven.
Do you normally interact with people who base their ideas on piss and wind?
In this particular case, the concept of anyone suggesting that it is libellous to call Farage a lying, devious shite over the Norway issue is beyond farcical. You don't have to dig very far to find the massive disconnect between what the lying, devious shite said before the Referendum and what the lying,devious shite says now.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DfNCwcTu9U6U&ved=0ahUKEwjE25-qwZTiAhVfThUIHRqXAQwQo7QBCCYwAA&usg=AOvVaw0-TWOLTkSURJQpFsko7zz5
Or then there was his visit to see Assange in the Ecuadorean embassy. A couple of days before Wikileaks leaked some hacked e-mails (hacked by the Russian IRA) that were massively helpful to Trump. He was stopped on the steps of the embassy by someone who asked him what he'd been doing there and his answer was that he couldn't remember. That's right. He couldn't remember as he came out of the door. So I'll call him a lying devious shite over that one as well.
-
BST, I'm sure you don't. If you did you wouldn't have time to express your potentially libellous accusations on a third division off-topic football forum.
-
BB
You've clearly got no idea how fast my fingers work.
-
BST, I know I should learn to not respond to your posts until you've finally edited them.
Eeh, third division off-topic football forums eh!
-
There you go BB have some more of the same, with a free set of steak knives!
''Brexit: Nigel Farage left red-faced after his incorrect facts about Ireland and EU on live TV''
https://www.indy100.com/article/nigel-farage-brexit-ireland-eu-claire-byrne-live-tv-rte-one-watch-video-8752246
-
TRB
As I was saying before BB stuck his two pennorth in to tell us we were embarrassing him, there used to be lots of folk on the Right telling us we should go for a Norway type deal. There's a good few in this thread here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/771751345841987584
And here's another video of Farage thumping the tub for a Norway arrangement.
https://t.co/7TwajXuVmN
Go on. All of you who tell us that the Brexit vote means we have to leave ALL the arrangements with the EU and that everyone knew that in 2016. Watch that video. Watch every second of it. And then sit down and have a think how that lying, devious shite has treated you as idiots, to be manipulated as he wishes.
-
Right.
I've just watched 2001: A Space Odyssey with the kids. They've just seen the most incomprehensible final 20 minutes of any film in history.
And that was easy to absorb compared to trying to figure out what the f**king hell BS is on about.
Well, if you don't know the meaning from 2001. Your not gonna get your head around brexit, probably why you've posted nothing but shite about it for 2 years.
-
BS
That's priceless.
You recycle a 20 year old bad joke about Ryanair, make some bizarre non-sequitur about the EU and accuse someone else of talking shite!
-
Francis Grove-White Retweeted People's Vote UK
Farage in 2015: "We will have our own free trade deal with the EU."
Farage in 2016: "If Norway, Iceland & Switzerland can get deals that suit them, we can get something far, far better than that."
Farage in 2019: "We didn’t vote for a deal."
Just Lies and more Lies
-
So they to use the hated football phrase "go again" in June. Meanwhile the country limps on in a state of paralysis with Farage likely to make successful election gains - super!
-
Scum always rises to the top? These are the people arranging the future of the UK to suit themselves.
''Arron Banks 'gave £450,000 funding to Nigel Farage after Brexit vote'
Tycoon provided Farage with Chelsea home, car and money to promote him in US, Channel 4 News claims''
''Banks is under investigation by the National Crime Agency over allegations of criminal offences by him and his unofficial leave campaign in the EU referendum. Farage has said that Banks is not funding the Brexit party.
According to Channel 4 News, the documents show that Banks and his companies, organised and funded visits to the US by Farage in the year after the referendum, including a trip in July 2016 to the Republican national convention''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/16/arron-banks-allegedly-gave-450000-funding-to-nigel-farage-after-brexit-vote
-
Sydney
It's even better than that.
The company Banks used to pay for Farage's £4m house and his chauffeur (man of the people eh?...my f**king sweaty arse. He's making idiots of you...) is the same one that the Electoral Commission accuse him of illegally using to fund Vote Leave. Illegal, because it's not a British registered company. And because it's not British registered, there was no way of clarifying where the company's income came from. But it DID suddenly have enough cash to start bankrolling Vote Leave and Farage's 5* lifestyle immediately after Banks had 13 meetings with the Russian Ambassador.
-
Sydney
It's even better than that.
The company Banks used to pay for Farage's £4m house and his chauffeur (man of the people eh?...my f**king sweaty arse. He's making idiots of you...) is the same one that the Electoral Commission accuse him of illegally using to fund Vote Leave. Illegal, because it's not a British registered company. And because it's not British registered, there was no way of clarifying where the company's income came from. But it DID suddenly have enough cash to start bankrolling Vote Leave and Farage's 5* lifestyle immediately after Banks had 13 meetings with the Russian Ambassador.
No comment-apparently
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2019/may/14/steve-bell-on-nigel-farage-and-the-brexit-party-cartoon
-
At the minute there are no charges against anyone if I start posting that you Sydney are let’s say up to no good is that ok? Same goes for you bst? Let’s see what charges as they must be criminals are brought against them before you have them hanged
-
At the minute there are no charges against anyone if I start posting that you Sydney are let’s say up to no good is that ok? Same goes for you bst? Let’s see what charges as they must be criminals are brought against them before you have them hanged
If you ever see me knowingly hanging around or consorting with known liars and deceptive people I hereby give you permission to do just that BP but you would want to be sure of your facts otherwise it's your own reputation that will suffer.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
-
Over to you BP, some questions, do you open and read any of the links, the people writing up these articles are open to libel proceedings if they get it wrong but so far Banks hasn't taken that option and it's not that he hasn't got the money to do so is it, why do you think that is?
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such a bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
-
Banks and his cronies HAVE regularly threatened journalists investigating them with legal action for libel. I believe the latest count is 12 threats and zero actual legal actions.
After C4 broadcast the new last night that Banks's overseas company paid for Farage's luxury lifestyle (ever think you've been conned lads?) Banks's bitch Andy Wigmore was straight on Twitter telling C4 that the FBI would be investigating them.
https://mobile.twitter.com/andywigmore/status/1129051727892799491
Except then he changed his mind and said it would be a private prosecution.
https://mobile.twitter.com/andywigmore/status/1129286378561376256
These are the people who run the Brexit scam folks.
Low grade bully City of London barrow boys. These are the ones who you seem to think are on your side. It's pitiful to watch you being played for disposable idiots by them.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
Don't beat yourself up about it BB it's been an impossible task to point to any credible experts that show the UK will be in a better financial position following any form of Brexit.
-
BB
The Electoral Commission is the independent body charged with ensuring that organisations stick to the law during elections.
You're calling them a bitter and twisted bunch of sour-faced losers?
And you keep telling us what a believer in democracy you are? Yet you keep up this act of only being interested in baiting people on the other side.
Strange, strange behaviour.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
Don't beat yourself up about it BB it's been an impossible task to point to any credible experts that show the UK will be in a better financial position following any form of Brexit.
It's only impossible because you won't accept anyone who disagrees with you as credible!
-
BB
The Electoral Commission is the independent body charged with ensuring that organisations stick to the law during elections.
You're calling them a bitter and twisted bunch of sour-faced losers?
And you keep telling us what a believer in democracy you are? Yet you keep up this act of only being interested in baiting people on the other side.
Strange, strange behaviour.
Yes, BST, I am.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
Don't beat yourself up about it BB it's been an impossible task to point to any credible experts that show the UK will be in a better financial position following any form of Brexit.
It's only impossible because you won't accept anyone who disagrees with you as credible!
The ones who have little or no credibility are those who ignore the facts and rely on sound-bites and rhetoric in an attempt to maintain an unsustainable stance. Now BB, tell us how we, as a country, are going to be better off outside the EU. In fact, just tell us how we are going to be as well off as we were before the referendum once outside the EU.
-
BB
The Electoral Commission is the independent body charged with ensuring that organisations stick to the law during elections.
You're calling them a bitter and twisted bunch of sour-faced losers?
And you keep telling us what a believer in democracy you are? Yet you keep up this act of only being interested in baiting people on the other side.
Strange, strange behaviour.
Yes, BST, I am.
Give it a rest BB. You're making yourself look stupid and you are a lot better than that.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
Don't beat yourself up about it BB it's been an impossible task to point to any credible experts that show the UK will be in a better financial position following any form of Brexit.
It's only impossible because you won't accept anyone who disagrees with you as credible!
[/quote,
Apologies I didn't realise you'd posted any, I don't always check, please repost the articles thanks BB
-
NNK
It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about crooks and spivs acting to undermine the entire democratic electoral process by syphoning in illegal money from overseas.
THAT is the big issue. And any body who says they passionately believe in democracy while ignoring that is either a liar or self-deluded.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
Don't beat yourself up about it BB it's been an impossible task to point to any credible experts that show the UK will be in a better financial position following any form of Brexit.
It's only impossible because you won't accept anyone who disagrees with you as credible!
[/quote,
Apologies I didn't realise you'd posted any, I don't always check, please repost the articles thanks BB
I haven't posted any, for the reasons given in my last post. But there are high profile credible 'experts' who agree with BREXIT.
I describe them as 'experts' loosely, in order to keep in line with your description of what are really only forecasters.
-
I agree with you there BB anyone that states we'll be better off would have to be described very loosley as an expert
-
Well, there you go then.
-
On the subject of the Withdrawal Bill that will be put before Parliament in the first week of June. It looks very likely that Labour, the Lib Dems and SNP will vote against the Second Reading. With the ERG and DUP also voting against, the Bill looks likely to be lost.
However, as a couple of MPs have pointed out, this makes a Second Referendum very unlikely and a No Deal Brexit very possible. The WA Bill, once it goes into Committee, could be amended in the way that the pro-Remain majority in Parliament wants. If the Bill falls, there would be no legislative vehicle to stop a new Hard Brexiteer Tory PM from doing nothing, and just allowing the UK to leave at the end of October with No Deal.
MPs on all sides need to think very carefully before they vote on this Bill.
-
NNK
It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about crooks and spivs acting to undermine the entire democratic electoral process by syphoning in illegal money from overseas.
THAT is the big issue. And any body who says they passionately believe in democracy while ignoring that is either a liar or self-deluded.
I agree with you BST that it is very important indeed. However, for the less well off in the country, (I strongly suspect that's the majority in those areas that overwhelmingly voted leave), the most important thing to them is money and what they can buy/rent with what they get. However we leave the EU these are the very people who will be worse off than they were before the referendum. The degree of their being worse off is entirely dependant on the type of deal, (or no deal), we ultimately get.
I used to feel sorry for them, but as time progresses their blindly repeating the mantra of leave whilst ignoring all the things that will affect them negatively leaves me to think that they deserve all that they get. It's akin to that famous line in many westerns, "Give me what's coming to me", just before the bad guy shoots them! Having said that, I genuinely feel sorry for those less well off people who voted remain and are being dragged down by those who simply can't see the wood for the trees.
-
Bpool.
Yes, in fairness, you are correct that no criminal charges have been brought against Banks.
This is the state of play with him.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/party-and-election-finance-to-keep/arron-banks,-better-for-the-country-and-others-referred-to-the-national-crime-agency-for-multiple-suspected-offences
That in itself is unprecedented. No one in our history has been referred to the police by the Electoral Commission for suspected criminal activity on that scale.
The police have taken six months over this investigation so far. This is the latest update.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Len_Duvall/status/1128296130830307328
Might that be because we have never had such a bitter and twisted, sour-faced, bunch of bad losers that are determined to overturn a democratically voted result by any desperate means available?
If you think they're sour faced and bitter now BB, just wait until next Thursday.
-
SS
We were talking about the Electoral Commission. Are you expecting THEM to be upset next Thursday?
-
SS
We were talking about the Electoral Commission. Are you expecting THEM to be upset next Thursday?
No Billy, we're talking about the whole of the Establishment.
Let me explain what's happened over the last 3 years. In 2016, two events happened that weren't supposed to happen, and horrified the whole of the Liberalist Establishment of the Western world; Donald Trump and Brexit; and the aim of the Establishment ever since has been to destroy them both, in any way they can.
Let me explain why these 2 things happened, along with the rise of Populist parties in Europe. When ordinary decent people feel that their concerns over crime, violence, terrorism, and immigration aren't being listened to by smug, arrogant, lazy liberalist politicians, they'll take revenge any way they can.
And before you come back at me like a ton of bricks, let me tell you that the above isn't just my opinion, it's the opinion of every journalist and pundit, of all political persuasions, I've heard over the last few weeks.
-
SS
We were talking about the Electoral Commission. Are you expecting THEM to be upset next Thursday?
No Billy, we're talking about the whole of the Establishment.
Let me explain what's happened over the last 3 years. In 2016, two events happened that weren't supposed to happen, and horrified the whole of the Liberalist Establishment of the Western world; Donald Trump and Brexit; and the aim of the Establishment ever since has been to destroy them both, in any way they can.
Let me explain why these 2 things happened, along with the rise of Populist parties in Europe. When ordinary decent people feel that their concerns over crime, violence, terrorism, and immigration aren't being listened to by smug, arrogant, lazy liberalist politicians, they'll take revenge any way they can.
And before you come back at me like a ton of bricks, let me tell you that the above isn't just my opinion, it's the opinion of every journalist and pundit, of all political persuasions, I've heard over the last few weeks.
Of course they did. It's called cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. It's the ordinary people who lose out through their own actions of taking revenge though; your so called Liberal Establishment will hardly be impacted at all.
-
SS
We were talking about the Electoral Commission. Are you expecting THEM to be upset next Thursday?
No Billy, we're talking about the whole of the Establishment.
Let me explain what's happened over the last 3 years. In 2016, two events happened that weren't supposed to happen, and horrified the whole of the Liberalist Establishment of the Western world; Donald Trump and Brexit; and the aim of the Establishment ever since has been to destroy them both, in any way they can.
Let me explain why these 2 things happened, along with the rise of Populist parties in Europe. When ordinary decent people feel that their concerns over crime, violence, terrorism, and immigration aren't being listened to by smug, arrogant, lazy liberalist politicians, they'll take revenge any way they can.
And before you come back at me like a ton of bricks, let me tell you that the above isn't just my opinion, it's the opinion of every journalist and pundit, of all political persuasions, I've heard over the last few weeks.
Of course they did. It's called cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. It's the ordinary people who lose out through their own actions of taking revenge though; your so called Liberal Establishment will hardly be impacted at all.
Hardly be impacted at all? Really? Have a look at how Labour and the Tories are doing in the polls.
-
Unsure here from your posts SS but am I correct in thinking you want a hard brexit and you support trump?
-
SS
We were talking about the Electoral Commission. Are you expecting THEM to be upset next Thursday?
No Billy, we're talking about the whole of the Establishment.
Let me explain what's happened over the last 3 years. In 2016, two events happened that weren't supposed to happen, and horrified the whole of the Liberalist Establishment of the Western world; Donald Trump and Brexit; and the aim of the Establishment ever since has been to destroy them both, in any way they can.
Let me explain why these 2 things happened, along with the rise of Populist parties in Europe. When ordinary decent people feel that their concerns over crime, violence, terrorism, and immigration aren't being listened to by smug, arrogant, lazy liberalist politicians, they'll take revenge any way they can.
And before you come back at me like a ton of bricks, let me tell you that the above isn't just my opinion, it's the opinion of every journalist and pundit, of all political persuasions, I've heard over the last few weeks.
Of course they did. It's called cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. It's the ordinary people who lose out through their own actions of taking revenge though; your so called Liberal Establishment will hardly be impacted at all.
Hardly be impacted at all? Really? Have a look at how Labour and the Tories are doing in the polls.
You seem to be missing the point SS, but then, leave supporters usually do - which is why we're in the mess we are in right now.
As for politicians, a large number of them have other sources of income; pity the less well off don't have that luxury.
A protest vote is all well and good if there is benefit in it for the voter, otherwise it's a waste of a vote. In the case of Brexit, a painful waste of a vote. I'm still waiting for leavers to tell me how we, as a country, will be as well off as we were before the referendum after we finally leave; let alone be better off.
-
Unsure here from your posts SS but am I correct in thinking you want a hard brexit and you support trump?
No Sydney, what I want is respect for democracy. The rights and wrongs of Brexit and Trump are utterly and totally irrelevant in all this; what is relevant is 17.4 million voters in the UK and 63 million voters in the US.
What is it about all this that you lot are unable to comprehend? Chill out man, have a drink, celebrate the Rovers' scintillating performance at Charlton, and stop letting all this business get you down.
I promise you I won't take the p*ss after Thursday.
-
" You seem to be missing the point SS, but then, leave supporters usually do - which is why we're in the mess we are in right now.
As for politicians, a large number of them have other sources of income; pity the less well off don't have that luxury.
A protest vote is all well and good if there is benefit in it for the voter, otherwise it's a waste of a vote. In the case of Brexit, a painful waste of a vote. I'm still waiting for leavers to tell me how we, as a country, will be as well off as we were before the referendum after we finally leave; let alone be better off. "
Don't hang around waiting for a reply it usually comes with the usual preamble about sovereignty ( which we absolutely have ) . Sandwiched in between you will be told how the £8 billion net a year can all be ploughed back into the NHS ( When in fact it won't) and finished off with how much better we will all be without all these immigrants we have to put up with ( although we have huge controls over most of it , the non- EU section is actually increasingy) . Finally and this is a biggy you will be told how we can renege on the £ 39 billion deal ( though we have agreed the terms and reasons why we are obligated to pay this amount ).......ALL without any collateral damage whatsoever.
Absolute drivel the lot of it but as long as it frightens the death out of the supposed liberal elite and fatcats , who incidentally they all appear to be any way ; Life will be fine in 30 years or so for the rest of us who aren't French emigrés, German passport holders, Belizean diplomats etc.
Don't forget it has nothing to do with immigrants, xenophobia, racism just about helping the people of Africa with their economies.Oh and everything to do about " Breaking Point " posters that don't apply to us ( being outside of SCHENGEN) and of course turning over our armed forces to the Germans ( When we have absolute sovereignty as pointed out before ) .
-
Hoola, It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about democracy.
-
Hoola, It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about democracy.
Well, Leave.uk didn't respect democracy as a political organisation. But that's OK, isn't it.
-
Hoola, It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about democracy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKV9bK-CBXo
-
https://youtu.be/jiUFPjulTW8
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9qJVgCqQOE
-
Hoola, It's far, far bigger than whether we are going to be better off inside or outside the EU. That's an entirely secondary issue.
The big issue is whether we as a population really care about democracy.
BB, democracy is Government for the People, by the People, in the Interests of the People. It certainly isn't Manipulation of the People, by a small minority of Rich People, in the Interests of those Rich People.
There's LIES
(https://i.imgur.com/MYv1yFA.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/bo95g6P.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/g5bLcRL.jpg)
Then there's FACTS
(https://i.imgur.com/r6DZXK6.jpg)
Of course, you can choose which to believe. But please, choose wisely, a lot of people didn't.
-
I think you'll find that Brexiters think democracy is a system of elected representatives, not a union run by unelected bureaucrats.
-
I think you'll find that Brexiters think democracy is a system of elected representatives, not a union run by unelected bureaucrats.
Yeah, p*ssed up unelected bureaucrats.
To answer NNK, yes mate, we'll all be voting wisely on Thursday.
-
The European Commission is the Civil Service of the EU. Every democratic organisation has a body of staff with varying executive powers that administer policy. In the case of the EC, it is overseen and headed by senior politicians who are chosen by the democratically elected governments of each of the member states.
Do you get really agitated about policy in the UK being implemented by unelected civil servants given various executive powers, under the overall control of Ministers chosen by the head of the democratically elected Government?
-
Brexiters get agitated by unelected bureaucrats from the European Commission administering policy in the UK before our own politicians and civil servants implement them.
-
Which policies do they get agitated about?
-
I suggest the main topic of this part of the argument is sovereignty.
-
So there must be a list of pretty serious stuff that the EU compels us to do or prevents us from doing that must really cut to the quick of people who feel.strongly about our sovereignty.
Anybody seen it?
-
Anybody could have seen this article from just after the referendum.
https://www.vox.com/2016/6/22/11992106/brexit-arguments
-
I think you'll find that Brexiters think democracy is a system of elected representatives, not a union run by unelected bureaucrats.
Yeah, p*ssed up unelected bureaucrats.
To answer NNK, yes mate, we'll all be voting wisely on Thursday.
I suspect that if you, or anyone for that matter, is voting for the Brexit Party - a party with no policies or manifesto - then you won't be voting wisely, you'll be voting stupidly. But then that's your choice, in the end you'll get what you deserve. Just don't complain when it bites your arse.
Tell me, who elected our current PM, Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Health Secretary etc etc? And you complain about the EU system! Christ on a bike, you're a classic example of why people shouldn't be allowed to vote on issues they clearly don't understand. Nah, you'd rather believe the lies written in the Daily Mail, Express etc!
-
The next Prime Minister of the UK will be elected by around 80 000 Conservative Party members. Which is 80 000 more people than chose the current one. Now there's democracy in action for you.
-
In the past 100 years, half of all Prime Ministers came into office ‘unelected’.
Isn't a general election opportunity for people in every part of the UK to choose their MP, not a Prime Minister?
-
In the past 100 years, half of all Prime Ministers came into office ‘unelected’.
Isn't a general election opportunity for people in every part of the UK to choose their MP, not a Prime Minister?
Precisely. We elect MPs. The British Public has never voted to make a specific individual Prime Minister - a position that is part of the Executive (ie the civil service). But apparently that's democratic, unlike that nasty unelected EU civil service.
-
Of course, you can't have a vote for every issue. Most decisions have to be made by the government and civil servants in every democratic society.
That's democracy as we in the UK know it.
Brexiters get agitated by unelected bureaucrats from the European Commission administering policy in the UK before our own politicians and civil servants implement them.
-
Of course, you can't have a vote for every issue. Most decisions have to be made by the government and civil servants in every democratic society.
That's democracy as we in the UK know it.
Brexiters get agitated by unelected bureaucrats from the European Commission administering policy in the UK before our own politicians and civil servants implement them.
Decisions are made by the legislature, not the executive. The executive administers the legislature's decision.
-
Whatever. But I doubt that will change Brexiters minds.
-
Whatever. But I doubt that will change Brexiters minds.
If they don't understand how it works in the first place, of course they won't change their mind.
-
Whatever. But I doubt that will change Brexiters minds.
If they don't understand how it works in the first place, of course they won't change their mind.
This. They've been told all the facts.
The UK has only voted against 2% of laws that have come from the EU, the high majority have been voted for. These are people that must hate seeing money put into poorer areas like ours as voting Brexit will only put more money in London and the rest will be held back because of austerity.
-
Have YOU been told all the facts? That 2% only relates to votes on proposed laws that were passed.
There are no official figures of how often the UK successfully opposed proposals or failed to get things it wanted.
-
You're right BB. That's why the UK was roped into joining Schengen and the Euro. We have no power to do anything thanks to those undemocratic unelected bureaucrats, so remember to vote in the upcoming democratic elections to elect someone to tell them what a bunch of unelected bureaucrats they all are.
-
Have YOU been told all the facts? That 2% only relates to votes on proposed laws that were passed.
There are no official figures of how often the UK successfully opposed proposals or failed to get things it wanted.
(https://i.imgur.com/rEr19D8.jpg)
-
Of course, you can't have a vote for every issue. Most decisions have to be made by the government and civil servants in every democratic society.
That's democracy as we in the UK know it.
Brexiters get agitated by unelected bureaucrats from the European Commission administering policy in the UK before our own politicians and civil servants implement them.
Aren't you forgetting, BB, that you're a remainer - or so you keep telling us - so how can you pretend to know what gets brexiters agitated?
-
i_ateallthepies. I was, like you, a remainer - but we lost - so I'm a leaver now - and the way I see it, we're all leavers now.
I know what get's brexiters agitated because I know some! I also know what gets former remainers, like me, agitated, because I know some of them too -
remoaners who only believe in democracy when it suits.
-
And the democracy you are advocating BB has been PROVEN to be corrupted. So, you're not a genuine advocate of democracy, quite the opposite in fact. Anyone with a modicum of common sense can see that.
-
And the democracy you are advocating BB has been PROVEN to be corrupted. So, you're not a genuine advocate of democracy, quite the opposite in fact. Anyone with a modicum of common sense can see that.
Save the whinging and whining for Thursday.
-
i_ateallthepies.
The way you remoaners have treated the leavers has been a major part of the argument, so there's no surprise in the content of your last post.
I'll just have to live with being considered a thick, xenophobic, undemocratic racist berk with no common sense, that's all!
At least I'm happy not being one of you lot!
-
BB
And there's the irony.
The one who REALLY thinks Leave voters are thick is Farage. After all, he plays up the anti-elite angle then assumes his supporters are too thick to get the discrepancy when 1/4 of his candidates have City of London or similar backgrounds.
The one who REALLY thinks you're undemocratic is Farage. He assumes that he can ride a coach and horses through electoral law, and you won't give a f**k about it because you don't believe in democracy.
The one who REALLY thinks you have no commonsense is Farage. Because when he's explaining about why it was OK for him to be bankrolled by a businessman to the tune of £400k for a Mayfair flat and a chauffeur driven Range Rover and first class flights to America at the same time as pocketing €9000/month plus expenses from the European Parliament, he says it was OK, because he was planning his life after politics. How thick must he think you are if he assumes you will not see through that one?!?
-
Have YOU been told all the facts? That 2% only relates to votes on proposed laws that were passed.
There are no official figures of how often the UK successfully opposed proposals or failed to get things it wanted.
I see that you made a statement and then completely ducked my answer to it.
So, here it is again, just for your benefit....
(https://i.imgur.com/rEr19D8.jpg)
Now, are you going to admit you were wrong? Or are you going to ignore facts as usual?
The more of your posts I read the more I think you're either a WUM or are deliberately Trolling. Whichever, it's quite clear that you know practically nothing about what democracy is!
-
BST. If you had a better track record in your predictions more of us with no common sense might believe you and maybe even support your hatred towards everyone you don't agree with.
-
Have YOU been told all the facts? That 2% only relates to votes on proposed laws that were passed.
There are no official figures of how often the UK successfully opposed proposals or failed to get things it wanted.
I see that you made a statement and then completely ducked my answer to it.
So, here it is again, just for your benefit....
(https://i.imgur.com/rEr19D8.jpg)
Now, are you going to admit you were wrong? Or are you going to ignore facts as usual?
The more of your posts I read the more I think you're either a WUM or are deliberately Trolling. Whichever, it's quite clear that you know practically nothing about what democracy is!
No, I can't, because There are no official figures! Besides, it's all about the principle.
-
I think even if you were presented with all the facts in the world about the corrupt process of brexit and the bad deal for the uk you would still moan about some false denial of democracy, still no use crying over spilt milk, hehe
-
It's reached the time when we really should be crying over spilt milk, considering there's supposed to be no snap in the shops by now!
-
BST. If you had a better track record in your predictions more of us with no common sense might believe you and maybe even support your hatred towards everyone you don't agree with.
Which predictions are those BB?
The one where I predicted in 2010 that Austerity would lead to a decade of depressed growth and wages, and a lurch to the populist anti-immigrant Right?
Or the one where I predicted Trump would be elected a year before the vote?
Or the one where I predicted the exact outcome of the Scottish independence referendum?
Or the countless times where I predicted that you would ignore facts put in from of you and come back with a daft ad hominem?
Hatred of people who don't agree with me?
Really?
You REALLY think that?
It's not hatred of people who don't agree with me you daft sod. It's bewilderment at people who won't engage with facts.
Thing is, I KNOW how smart you are. Never doubted that. And I don't hate you for disagreeing with me. I just don't get your method of arguing. Which seems to consist of repeatedly asking the same questions, ignoring the answers then accusing people of being condescending.
-
Have YOU been told all the facts? That 2% only relates to votes on proposed laws that were passed.
There are no official figures of how often the UK successfully opposed proposals or failed to get things it wanted.
I see that you made a statement and then completely ducked my answer to it.
So, here it is again, just for your benefit....
(https://i.imgur.com/rEr19D8.jpg)
Now, are you going to admit you were wrong? Or are you going to ignore facts as usual?
The more of your posts I read the more I think you're either a WUM or are deliberately Trolling. Whichever, it's quite clear that you know practically nothing about what democracy is!
No, I can't, because There are no official figures! Besides, it's all about the principle.
That's odd. No official figures, but you state it's happening. What do you know that the officials don't?
Brexiters get agitated by unelected bureaucrats from the European Commission administering policy in the UK before our own politicians and civil servants implement them.
-
BST. If you had a better track record in your predictions more of us with no common sense might believe you and maybe even support your hatred towards everyone you don't agree with.
Which predictions are those BB?
The one where I predicted in 2010 that Austerity would lead to a decade of depressed growth and wages, and a lurch to the populist anti-immigrant Right?
Or the one where I predicted Trump would be elected a year before the vote?
Or the one where I predicted the exact outcome of the Scottish independence referendum?
Or the countless times where I predicted that you would ignore facts put in from of you and come back with a daft ad hominem?
Hatred of people who don't agree with me?
Really?
You REALLY think that?
It's not hatred of people who don't agree with me you daft sod. It's bewilderment at people who won't engage with facts.
Thing is, I KNOW how smart you are. Never doubted that. And I don't hate you for disagreeing with me. I just don't get your method of arguing. Which seems to consist of repeatedly asking the same questions, ignoring the answers then accusing people of being condescending.
BST. I was thinking more of predictions that are on the subject of Brexit, such as the one about there being no food on the shelves by now.
-
You really thought that was a prediction rather than a deliberate over-exaggeration to make a point?
And there was me thinking you had one of the best senses of humour in here.
See, what you've done is what Leave.EU did the other day. There was an excellent documentary following despairing EU MEPs through the process of the Brexit negotiations. At one point, a couple of the junior researchers were, at the end of a particularly difficult day, jokingly saying to the camera, "You see our plan! It's worked! To make UK a colony of Europe! Ha-ha."
The lying, devious Kitsons at Leave.EU tweeted that video clip and it was watched by thousands. They cut it before the researchers burst out laughing and rolled their eyes and they cut out the bit at the start where they made it clear they were parodying how the Brexit-maniacs want you to see EU officials. Because Leave.EU want to deliberately misrepresent humour as something they can throw at Leave supporters to wind them up.
When they do that, they are clearly and unquestionably treating their followers with contempt by choosing to misrepresent something that was never intended to be taken remotely seriously. They do that because they are lying, devious Kitsons. Why you do it, I have no idea.
-
You really thought that was a prediction rather than a deliberate over-exaggeration to make a point?
It was deliberate scaremongering. Not one you'd invented, I admit, but one that that you'd jumped on the bandwagon of.
And there was me thinking you had one of the best senses of humour in here.
Oh, I laughed at it!
-
BST. If you had a better track record in your predictions more of us with no common sense might believe you and maybe even support your hatred towards everyone you don't agree with.
Which predictions are those BB?
The one where I predicted in 2010 that Austerity would lead to a decade of depressed growth and wages, and a lurch to the populist anti-immigrant Right?
Or the one where I predicted Trump would be elected a year before the vote?
Or the one where I predicted the exact outcome of the Scottish independence referendum?
Or the countless times where I predicted that you would ignore facts put in from of you and come back with a daft ad hominem?
Hatred of people who don't agree with me?
Really?
You REALLY think that?
It's not hatred of people who don't agree with me you daft sod. It's bewilderment at people who won't engage with facts.
Thing is, I KNOW how smart you are. Never doubted that. And I don't hate you for disagreeing with me. I just don't get your method of arguing. Which seems to consist of repeatedly asking the same questions, ignoring the answers then accusing people of being condescending.
BST. I was thinking more of predictions that are on the subject of Brexit, such as the one about there being no food on the shelves by now.
Oh there is plenty of food on the shelves right now BB but only by courtesy of those donating time money and goods to food banks, remind me how many there are in the UK? or just ignore the question.
-
''Electoral Commission to visit Brexit party offices over funding concerns''
''Brown said the European parliament should be investigating the disclosures last week that Farage had received about £450,000 in financial support from Arron Banks, the Eurosceptic businessman who funded Farage’s Leave.EU Brexit campaign during the 2016 referendum. That could be a clear conflict of interest with Farage’s duties as an MEP, he added''
Farage accused Brown of an “absolutely disgusting smear” against his party. “This from the man who was part of a Labour party who, through Lord Levy, were making a lot of big donors members of the House of Lords,”
I would have been more impressed if Farage had said we have nothing to hide are accounts are open for all to see.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/20/electoral-commission-visit-brexit-party-offices-funding-gordon-brown-paypal
-
You really thought that was a prediction rather than a deliberate over-exaggeration to make a point?
It was deliberate scaremongering. Not one you'd invented, I admit, but one that that you'd jumped on the bandwagon of.
Jesus wept.
Honest suggestion. I think you need some time off pal.
-
Sydney. What have food banks got to do with BST's comments? He claimed there would be no food on shops shelves by May this year!
-
Sydney. What have food banks got to do with BST's comments? He claimed there would be no food on shops shelves by May this year!
It was a sort non sequitur poke at any VSC tory supporters, I thought you would have recognised that immediately.
Modified: And this is why I keep banging on about it ............
''In modern Britain, hunger has become normal. That is an outrage''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/21/britain-hunger-food-poverty
i thought you may have had
-
Yes, Sydney. If that's the case it is definitely time to say goodbye to the big two parties and vote for an alternative one that Wants Fundamental Political Change.
-
BB
And there's the irony.
The one who REALLY thinks Leave voters are thick is Farage. After all, he plays up the anti-elite angle then assumes his supporters are too thick to get the discrepancy when 1/4 of his candidates have City of London or similar backgrounds.
The one who REALLY thinks you're undemocratic is Farage. He assumes that he can ride a coach and horses through electoral law, and you won't give a f**k about it because you don't believe in democracy.
The one who REALLY thinks you have no commonsense is Farage. Because when he's explaining about why it was OK for him to be bankrolled by a businessman to the tune of £400k for a Mayfair flat and a chauffeur driven Range Rover and first class flights to America at the same time as pocketing €9000/month plus expenses from the European Parliament, he says it was OK, because he was planning his life after politics. How thick must he think you are if he assumes you will not see through that one?!?
The same way that Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, and the rest of the sleazebags regarded Lib Dem voters as being thick and without common sense in 2010?
-
May's 10 points to amend that WaB, the key statement is ''for the life of this parliament'' so whatever workers rights, backstop etc etc when the period is up it's everyone for themselves, does anyone think they will get a good deal with boris in charge?
from the evil Guardian:
1. Alternative arrangements
What is it? A pledge to seek another way to solve the Northern Irish backstop conundrum by finding different border plans, most likely involving technology, before the backstop deadline of December 2020.
Who will like it? It is aimed at Tory Brexiters and the Democratic Unionist party, but the pledge is not new and too woolly to be worth much.
2. Keeping Northern Ireland aligned
What is it? A promise that if the backstop does come into force, Northern Ireland will stay aligned with the rest of the UK on regulations and customs rather than be separated by a border in the Irish Sea.
Who will like it? See point one. This is aimed at the same people, and they will be similarly underwhelmed.
3. MPs’ approval
What is it? It says “negotiating objectives and final treaties” must be approved by MPs.
Who will like it? In theory, a broad range of MPs will be encouraged by this guarantee of their role. In reality, it makes little difference.
4. Workers’ rights
What is it? A promised new bill guaranteeing that workers’ rights in the UK will not lag behind those in the EU.
Who will like it? Labour MPs in leave seats, although this has already been promised several times and is thus factored in.
5. Environmental protection
What is it? Similar to the above point, a guarantee that standards will not dip below EU ones, with a new independent watchdog to monitor this.
Who will like it? Mainly Labour MPs and green-minded Tories, though again, apart from the promised watchdog, this is nothing new.
6. Frictionless trade
What is it? A promise to seek “as close to frictionless trade in goods with the EU as possible while outside the single market and ending free movement”.
Who will like it? This is essentially a restatement of the blindingly obvious implied by May’s longstanding commitments, so it’s hard to see how it will impress anyone.
7. Just-in time supply chains
What is it? A pledge to match EU rules for goods and agrifood products that might otherwise face border checks, thus avoiding excess delays for businesses.
Who will like it? As with six, it’s not so much that anyone will object to this as whether it can be delivered.
8. A ‘customs compromise’
What is it? MPs will be allowed to decide on post-Brexit customs arrangements – but from a choice of a temporary customs unions or May’s existing plan for a “customs arrangement”.
Who will like it? Potentially, no one. Some Tories will dislike the prospect of even a temporary customs union; Labour MPs want a permanent one, which is not on offer.
9. Second referendum
What is it? A guarantee of a Commons vote on whether the final deal should be subject to a confirmatory referendum.
Who will like it? Again, possibly not very many people. Opponents of a second referendum will dislike the concession; those who back the idea want a guarantee of a new public vote.
10. Changes to political declaration
What is it? A “legal duty” to secure the necessary changes to the political declaration added to the deal with the EU to reflect the changes.
Who will like it? This also seems like a completely obvious thing to do, raising the possibility it was mainly added to the list to round it up to 10.
It appears that the conservatives have been outmanoeuvred by the feckless May, cannot get rid of her unless she agrees to go.
''Theresa May proves herself the woman who has nothing for everyone''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/theresa-may-proves-herself-the-woman-who-ha
-
And yet it still will not get through will it?
A very senior person in my business yesterday summed it up by saying frankly it does not matter what Brexit we get but that we end it one way or another as the uncertainty is what kills us.
I think we could all agree we want it sorting one way or another.....
-
I can see it being the end of May by next Friday........
-
And yet it still will not get through will it?
A very senior person in my business yesterday summed it up by saying frankly it does not matter what Brexit we get but that we end it one way or another as the uncertainty is what kills us.
I think we could all agree we want it sorting one way or another.....
Aye .... and oh the irony again (my first post for aeons) - Tory MPs have a Vote of no Confidence in the Prime Minister. They do not vote to remove her and under the rules (their own rules) she cannot be challenged again and so is "safe" for 12 Months
However they now want to get rid of her and are trying ways to change the Rules (their own rules) so they can have another vote - while all the time studiously ignoring a lot of people asking for another vote on an issue now 3 years old.
They've only managed about 4 Months (cant be bothered to look) - bloody hypocrites
-
She is a problem though and has been a disaster. Granted lots of that is in her own making she inherited the impossible yet somehow made it worse.
-
It's quite breathtaking how bad she has been. The political editor of The Times was on R4 tonight talking about it. And bear in mind that The Times is politically very much in the same place as May.
He said that she firstly overplayed her hand in insisting on a hard Brexit. Then called an election she had no need to call and lost. Then failed to do the only thing she then could have done to secure Brexit from there - reach out to form a cross-party consensus. Then reached out to form a cross-party consensus after she'd said she was about to resign, meaning anything she pledged to the other parties wasn't worth the paper it was written on.
It's a record of failure that is simply beyond belief. Not getting minor things wrong. Getting fundamental strategy wrong over and over and over again.
But in many ways, the most damning thing he said wasn't that. He said that for the past 2 years, Cabinet ministers have spoken to him privately saying that they have Cabinet meetings and they have no idea what has been agreed. One side says one thing. The other side argue for something else. Then after the meeting, May makes a speech saying that Cabinet policy is something else entirely. Something that they didn't even discuss.
I genuinely do wonder if she is clinically insane. I don't doubt at all that she has a personality defect that makes her incapable of interacting with other people.
-
And now Leadsom jumps ship..... give May 24 hours tops now
-
And now Leadsom jumps ship..... give May 24 hours tops now
Now that would be something else - a Conservative leader resigning on the day of a national election.
-
May has been PM for less than 3 years. This is the THIRTY-SIXTH ministerial resignation! More than one a month.
Context.
Blair was PM for more than ten years. He had 18 ministers resign. Fewer than one every 6 months.
This is without question the most dysfunctional Govt in modern history.
-
Whaddya know? Looks like the BBC have been thinking the same.
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2019/5/22/692d8653-97a4-4e3c-892f-efd6fc12cf77.png)
-
Tomorrow is the perfect time to put in a motion of no confidence in the government, lets see if these Tory back stabbers really do want her out 😀😀😀
-
Tomorrow is the perfect time to put in a motion of no confidence in the government, lets see if these Tory back stabbers really do want her out 😀😀😀
They want just her out, not a general election.
-
Tomorrow is the perfect time to put in a motion of no confidence in the government, lets see if these Tory back stabbers really do want her out 😀😀😀
They want just her out, not a general election.
I know that, but current tory party rules prevent it, so put the back stabbing bas**rds on the spot, see ifthey have got any balls 😂😂😂
-
Tomorrow is the perfect time to put in a motion of no confidence in the government, lets see if these Tory back stabbers really do want her out 😀😀😀
If Corbyn has any sense he'd call for a Confidence vote. Either the Tories back her to avoid an election and look hypocritical and gutless; or they vote against her and trigger a general election...which would happen too soon to be able to replace May and she'd have to lead them into it! Sounds like a win-win to me.
They want just her out, not a general election.
I know that, but current tory party rules prevent it, so put the back stabbing bas**rds on the spot, see ifthey have got any balls 😂😂😂
-
''It’s hard to imagine. But could this really be the end for the Tories?''
Fingers crossed and milkshakes at the ready!
Guardian comment:
''Thanks for this excellent clip! Leadsom and the rest really did promise absolutely tariff-free easy trade with the EU. Yet now they say only No Deal is "real" Brexit, crashing out with nothing.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/23/end-tories-brexit-election-day-voters-farage#comment-129382020
Farage "So the ukip answer this this there is absolutely nothing to fear in terms of trade from leaving the EU because On D+1 we'll find ourselves part of the EU economic area and with a free trade deal and we should use our membership of the EEA as a holding from which we can negotiate as the EU's biggest export market in the world as a good a deal in the world ...........''
I know this has been posted before but whenever I hear people banging on about brexit I like to play it again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoYwS1gJ8aE&feature=youtu.be
-
So, we're three years into the greatest national crisis since the War, we're two months past the deadline for Brexit, were five months from the next deadline and the Govt is going to be paralysed for the next 2 months sorting out the coronation of Boris f**king Johnson.
Ken Clarke has just summed it up on R4. The next few weeks are going to be a grim period of a group of Tories kicking lumps out of each other to prove who is the most Europhobic.
We are an international embarrassment. And whoever wins won't change the fact that there's no form of Brexit that commands a majority in the House or the country.
-
So, we're three years into the greatest national crisis since the War, we're two months past the deadline for Brexit, were five months from the next deadline and the Govt is going to be paralysed for the next 2 months sorting out the coronation of Boris f**king Johnson.
Ken Clarke has just summed it up on R4. The next few weeks are going to be a grim period of a group of Tories kicking lumps out of each other to prove who is the most Europhobic.
We are an international embarrassment. And whoever wins won't change the fact that there's no form of Brexit that commands a majority in the House or the country.
Is 17.4 million enough of a mandate?
-
16.4 million. Do keep up.
And no anyway. Because, as you'd know if you stopped and thought, ther...
Oh f**k it. It's like banging your head against a wall.
-
Good god .... I will be please to see the back of May. Maybot or whatever epithet people want to apply to her
There is little doubt that (as someone says above) she is not wired up like a normal person. Call it stubborness or bloody mindedness I donr know but she "aint"
The downside is ffs - WHAT the hell is the alternative ? Johnson Raab Fox Gove and any of the others being bandied about are frightening - so should I be hoping May holds on to the bannister at Number 10 and refuses to leave ?
-
Oh gawd .... that's torn it ! She's gone
-
So, we're three years into the greatest national crisis since the War, we're two months past the deadline for Brexit, were five months from the next deadline and the Govt is going to be paralysed for the next 2 months sorting out the coronation of Boris f**king Johnson.
Ken Clarke has just summed it up on R4. The next few weeks are going to be a grim period of a group of Tories kicking lumps out of each other to prove who is the most Europhobic.
We are an international embarrassment. And whoever wins won't change the fact that there's no form of Brexit that commands a majority in the House or the country.
Is 17.4 million enough of a mandate?
You're forgetting to subtract the Remain votes.
-
So, we're three years into the greatest national crisis since the War, we're two months past the deadline for Brexit, were five months from the next deadline and the Govt is going to be paralysed for the next 2 months sorting out the coronation of Boris f**king Johnson.
Ken Clarke has just summed it up on R4. The next few weeks are going to be a grim period of a group of Tories kicking lumps out of each other to prove who is the most Europhobic.
We are an international embarrassment. And whoever wins won't change the fact that there's no form of Brexit that commands a majority in the House or the country.
Is 17.4 million enough of a mandate?
You're forgetting to subtract the Remain votes.
They lost, so they don't count. First past the post, winner takes all.
-
Axholme,
An advisory referendum is not like a General Election.
"First past the post, winner takes all" is not relevant.
You would not suggest that the result of a GE should be binding indefinetly....it applies only to the period a government is in power.
So why would an out of date referendum, conducted in 2016, still hold when circumstances have changed and a new administration takes charge?
Democracy is renewable...it needs to be refreshed as things change and move on!
-
Axholme,
An advisory referendum is not like a General Election.
"First past the post, winner takes all" is not relevant.
You would not suggest that the result of a GE should be binding indefinetly....it applies only to the period a government is in power.
So why would an out of date referendum, conducted in 2016, still hold when circumstances have changed and a new administration takes charge?
Democracy is renewable...it needs to be refreshed as things change and move on!
Is democracy to keep on voting until you get the 'right' answer?
-
Axholme,
An advisory referendum is not like a General Election.
"First past the post, winner takes all" is not relevant.
You would not suggest that the result of a GE should be binding indefinetly....it applies only to the period a government is in power.
So why would an out of date referendum, conducted in 2016, still hold when circumstances have changed and a new administration takes charge?
Democracy is renewable...it needs to be refreshed as things change and move on!
Is democracy to keep on voting until you get the 'right' answer?
Was the 2017 General Election not democratic when faced with 'No deal is better than an bad deal' & 'Brexit means Brexit' the public said, nah dont fancy that.
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1131924165714432000
It IS going to go on forever isn't it? Round this same old f**king hamster wheel again.
Another one lining up to feed us this stupid idea that we must threaten to walk away to get a good deal. Knowing that the idea of us walking away is not a credible threat. You don't negotiate by saying "give me what I want or I'll blow my own kneecaps off and you'll get splattered by blood." Not to intelligent people on the other side of the table. Because they know that you don't mean it.
What Johnson is doing here is being the next one in line to show how much he holds you lads in contempt. Because HE knows that he doesn't mean this. But he thinks YOU lot are too f**king thick to work that out, and that you'll support him as the Great Leader.
Remember when May did that? 2 years ago? No Deal is better than a bad deal? Except it wasn't. And everyone round the negotiating table knew it was a puerile bluff served up for people at home to guzzle down.
And now, here we are again. About to repeat the whole shit shock with different actors. And it'll carry on whilever you lot keep swallowing it.
-
Axholme,
An advisory referendum is not like a General Election.
"First past the post, winner takes all" is not relevant.
You would not suggest that the result of a GE should be binding indefinetly....it applies only to the period a government is in power.
So why would an out of date referendum, conducted in 2016, still hold when circumstances have changed and a new administration takes charge?
Democracy is renewable...it needs to be refreshed as things change and move on!
Is democracy to keep on voting until you get the 'right' answer?
Dunno, why don't we ask David Davis his opinion on a country changing its mind?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-countries-democracy-brexit-vote-article-50-second-referendum-a7629636.html
-
Axholme,
An advisory referendum is not like a General Election.
"First past the post, winner takes all" is not relevant.
You would not suggest that the result of a GE should be binding indefinetly....it applies only to the period a government is in power.
So why would an out of date referendum, conducted in 2016, still hold when circumstances have changed and a new administration takes charge?
Democracy is renewable...it needs to be refreshed as things change and move on!
Is democracy to keep on voting until you get the 'right' answer?
Dunno, why don't we ask David Davis his opinion on a country changing its mind?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-countries-democracy-brexit-vote-article-50-second-referendum-a7629636.html
Hypocrisy, brexit truly knows thy meaning.
-
Johnson showed his true colours when he bought into Mays deal providing she resigned
Cant believe Hancock is standing he can’t even put a sentence together
-
I can't believe Raab is even being considered, knowing he didn't actually realise how important the Dover-Calais crossing was. Batshit mental.
-
I can't believe Raab is even being considered, knowing he didn't actually realise how important the Dover-Calais crossing was. Batshit mental.
I'm not sure which was the more pitiable issue about Raab. The fact that he didn't know that, or the fact that he didn't realise how utterly out of his depth he would appear by publicly admitting he didn't know it.
-
Cant believe Hancock is considering standing for the job either
No sign of the weasel Fox yet
Get Grayling in and he can promise an end to the Pacer trains (yet again)
Hunt rhymes with something that decribes him well. Couldnt remember his wifes Nationality recently - at least he will be paying for that for the rest of his life
Raab incompetent
Leadsome - like May only more of a bully
Johnson - (insert your own thoughts as mine would be libelous)
Gove - two faced last time Johnson was going for the job - so he will need to be watched
Oh yes - someone told me once "be careful what you wish for" and I wanted May exposed as PROBABLY the incompetent PM I have the misfortune to live under. I finally got my wish but now what ?
-
The point is, there's not a single one of those who is a skilled politician.
Skilled politicians are intelligent deal-makers. They know what their strengths and weaknesses are. They know when to attack and when to defend. When to threaten and when to collaborate.
Thatcher had an image as someone who always crusaded for precisely what she believed in, and contemplated no compromise. But nothing could be further from the truth, at least in her earlier years before she lost it. Thatcher was superb at playing her hand skillfully. Knowing what her strengths and weaknesses were and acting accordingly.
May was f**king dreadful at that.
I don't see anyone in that list who is any better than May.
-
Johnson for me! Now bear with me for a moment, he placed himself in the out camp purley for his career! Lent some much needed credibility to it as well. Probably wouldn't have won it without him siding.
It's a short term position as a general election can't be far off.
Let him have it and be exposed as the tit he is!! Will then purge him from politics forever, the short term pain will be worth it 😆
-
And by then a no deal Brexit mmmm yep just what the 52% voted for of course
-
Usually, the winner of Conservative Leadership contests is the candidate with the least enemies in the Party, and given how heavily split it is on Brexit you'd struggle to identify any of the front runners as the one with the least enemies.
If Sir Graham Brady puts his name forward as expected, then I expect him to poll more popular with MPs than any other runners, but I don't know if he would be so popular with the members given that is isn't a prominent figure outside of Westminster.
My money is on Sajid Javid. Remainer turned Leaver and the way he handled the whole Begum citizenship saga would have appealed to the typical Tory Member.
-
.... and Gove has now thrown his hat in the ring.
-
Now one would think that a solicitor in the position of Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor in the British Conservative Party representing the government writing in a national newspaper would be playing it straight down line, no possible wriggle room here with his own and what is left of tory party credibility at stake.
''In a clear attack on Johnson, Gauke, writing in today’s Observer, warns that candidates who fail to acknowledge the “enormously harmful” effects of crashing out of the EU will fuel populism and risk doing untold harm to the economy and national interest''
''Enorously harmful''
So which one of the wreckers would like put their reputation on the line and stand up and say that he's wrong or being disingenuous?
-
Have a think on this for a minute. Johnson is the clear favourite among the Tory party membership. What will be the consequences for the party if he is not in the final two for those members to vote for?
-
Have a think on this for a minute. Johnson is the clear favourite among the Tory party membership. What will be the consequences for the party if he is not in the final two for those members to vote for?
An interesting article on that subject Wilts:
This prime minister was destroyed by Brexit. And the next one will be too.
https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/05/23/this-prime-minister-was-destroyed-by-brexit-and-the-next-one
Which was linked to from this one:
''The Tories have abandoned thought in favour of believing their own lies''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/25/the-tories-have-abandoned-thought-in-favour-of-believing-their-own-lies
-
Have a think on this for a minute. Johnson is the clear favourite among the Tory party membership. What will be the consequences for the party if he is not in the final two for those members to vote for?
Interesting hypothetical question. But it won't happen in the real world. He needs 100-120 Tory MPs' votes to make the cut. He'll get that.
-
Gove's not that bad though, he does at least have a bit about him and has had a few decent policies in his role. He's doing a fairly good job at environment.
A lot of them should be nowhere near though, but it will be an interesting battle. Johnson is an idiot at times but people like him for some reason....
-
Gove can go f**k himself.
He's the most horrible of politicians - a self-serving, ex-Murdoch journalist wordsmith whose every word and every move is designed to further his own career.
His comment in the 2016 Referendum campaign about economists who pointed out the negatives of Brexit being like the experts who backed Hitler and how we shouldn't listen to experts (meaning we should trust our own prejudices over facts) were disgusting and in normal times would finish off a political career.
And it's not just my opinion about him being a moral vacuum. A cabinet minister recently said that Gove's career-ling wrestling match with his conscience was the longest unbeaten winning streak in political history.
That said, I do hope he wins. He did as much as anyone to tip us into this pike of shite. He deserves to have to face the consequences of having his career destroyed by having to deal with the reality of what he did.
-
Have a think on this for a minute. Johnson is the clear favourite among the Tory party membership. What will be the consequences for the party if he is not in the final two for those members to vote for?
An interesting article on that subject Wilts:
This prime minister was destroyed by Brexit. And the next one will be too.
https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/05/23/this-prime-minister-was-destroyed-by-brexit-and-the-next-one
Which was linked to from this one:
''The Tories have abandoned thought in favour of believing their own lies''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/25/the-tories-have-abandoned-thought-in-favour-of-believing-their-own-lies
So we have Gove saying 1000's of economists saying wrexit will be bad, Gauke (above) saying it will be bad and now the Secretary of State for International development spelling out disaster.
Mr Stewart was clear enough: “a no-deal Brexit would in a single day undermine 400 years of our reputation for economic stability and competence”, he tweeted on Sunday. He is right.
But that's OK cos Boris said we'll be fine and when such an honest well respected figure says something the population heed it, why? f**k knows?
So again, whom amongst us are prepared to stand up and say these stalwarts of the tory party are wrong and we'll be better with wrexit?
-
So Thornberry and McDonnell have openly and publicly told Corbyn he's wrong and that Labour must clearly support Ref2. Thornberry on TV last night was clearly having trouble holding her temper when talking about Corbyn's policy of trying to ride both horses. Even Richard Burgon who has been steadfastly against Ref2 sounded like he's coming round to that on the radio this morning.
Still, I'm sure they're all wrong and St Jeremy the Infallible has called it right all along...
-
If only they had a centerist leader with a clear policy to remain then they might have won nearly 4% of the vote. Which according to that party's Brexit spokesperson is an 'excellent result'. Wonder what a bad one would have been...
-
I'm not sure what in earth your point is there Wilts, but I'm sure it's clear to you.
-
I think Corbyn would have wanted to shed a few more Blairites to Change UK before coming out more strongly on Ref2, but after the other nights results they are probs off to join libdem anyway so might as well do it now and go the deselection route with the Blairites.
-
I think Corbyn would have wanted to shed a few more Blairites to Change UK before coming out more strongly on Ref2, but after the other nights results they are probs off to join libdem anyway so might as well do it now and go the deselection route with the Blairites.
Indeed. I mean it totally makes them have zero chance of winning an election but they may be popular in London at least...
I forget the theorist but there is a well spoken business strategy that applies to politics, middle of the road is the route to failure as you end up pleasing nobody.
-
BFYP.
Things change.
For most of the post-War period, it was a given that you needed to appeal to the centre to win power. That was because most people identified themselves as having views that were close to the centre. Churchill, Major, Blair and Cameron all won power by presenting themselves as more moderate and closer to the centre than their opponents. Wilson, Heath and MacMillan held power for 20 years in an era where both sides basically bought into the same centrist narrative and there was little ideological difference between them. Thatcher was the one outlier, but even she didn't paint herself as an extremist initially, and she would have lasted only one term but for being supremely fortunate in having a terminally divided opponent at home and a fascist junta to fight abroad.
Things are different now. Both main parties have spun off to the extremes, while the party that should have gained from this (the LDs) hobbled itself by getting into bed with Cameron's Austerity drive. Add to that Brexit, which has driven a wedge between opinions and there is very little centre ground. How this pans out from here is anyone's guess. We've not seen a political landscape like this since the 1920s.
-
So Thornberry and McDonnell have openly and publicly told Corbyn he's wrong and that Labour must clearly support Ref2. Thornberry on TV last night was clearly having trouble holding her temper when talking about Corbyn's policy of trying to ride both horses. Even Richard Burgon who has been steadfastly against Ref2 sounded like he's coming round to that on the radio this morning.
Still, I'm sure they're all wrong and St Jeremy the Infallible has called it right all along...
Thornberry came across as the most arrogant person I think I've seen on tv on results night.
-
So Thornberry and McDonnell have openly and publicly told Corbyn he's wrong and that Labour must clearly support Ref2. Thornberry on TV last night was clearly having trouble holding her temper when talking about Corbyn's policy of trying to ride both horses. Even Richard Burgon who has been steadfastly against Ref2 sounded like he's coming round to that on the radio this morning.
Still, I'm sure they're all wrong and St Jeremy the Infallible has called it right all along...
Thornberry came across as the most arrogant person I think I've seen on tv on results night.
You obviously missed Mark Francois's egofest then.
-
Alastair Campbell comes across as the most arrogant condescending person in politics.
-
So Thornberry and McDonnell have openly and publicly told Corbyn he's wrong and that Labour must clearly support Ref2. Thornberry on TV last night was clearly having trouble holding her temper when talking about Corbyn's policy of trying to ride both horses. Even Richard Burgon who has been steadfastly against Ref2 sounded like he's coming round to that on the radio this morning.
Still, I'm sure they're all wrong and St Jeremy the Infallible has called it right all along...
Thornberry came across as the most arrogant person I think I've seen on tv on results night.
You obviously missed Mark Francois's egofest then.
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
-
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
Remind us again how it's going to benefit everyone, especially the working class?
-
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
Remind us again how it's going to benefit everyone, especially the working class?
They never answer that.
-
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
Remind us again how it's going to benefit everyone, especially the working class?
Thousands of Poles pushing down wages by taking work from those who need it most.
-
AL
I'm guessing you were too busy moaning about Liverpool to notice that interview where Farage said he didn't expect immigration to change much after Brexit.
You really, really don't get the extent to which you're being played do you?
Look at who runs the Brexit party. Look at who Farage's mates are. Look who the BP candidates were last week. Low grade City of London spivs and business people.
The Britain they want is low taxes for them and low wages for UK companies. They KNOW how much you hate immigrants and they are playing to that. But the thought that they would lift a finger to make your life better is ridiculous.
-
AL
I'm guessing you were too busy moaning about Liverpool to notice that interview where Farage said he didn't expect immigration to change much after Brexit.
You really, really don't get the extent to which you're being played do you?
Look at who runs the Brexit party. Look at who Farage's mates are. Look who the BP candidates were last week. Low grade City of London spivs and business people.
The Britain they want is low taxes for them and low wages for UK companies. They KNOW how much you hate immigrants and they are playing to that. But the thought that they would lift a finger to make your life better is ridiculous.
No one is going to make my life better but if I can stop people coming here and taking the piss that will do for me. Life is tough so we just have to deal with it. I will never be able to retire but who cares?
-
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
Remind us again how it's going to benefit everyone, especially the working class?
Thousands of Poles pushing down wages by taking work from those who need it most.
Where do you get that thousands of Poles are pushing wages down from AL? Oh, I know, the Daily Mail!
FFS, that myth has been disproved countless times, just more Brexit propaganda to sucker the gullible!
-
Bad losers, again! Brexit is coming.
Remind us again how it's going to benefit everyone, especially the working class?
Thousands of Poles pushing down wages by taking work from those who need it most.
Where do you get that thousands of Poles are pushing wages down from AL? Oh, I know, the Daily Mail!
FFS, that myth has been disproved countless times, just more Brexit propaganda to sucker the gullible!
The smaller the pool of workers that employers have to pick from the higher the wage they have to pay to get them.
-
AL
That is folksy common sense but it doesn't mesh with the real world.
It assumes an economy is static with a fixed amount of work to go round. That ain't how the real world works.
Study after study after study have shown that hard working immigrants grow economies faster than they take out. So there's more work available. And wages don't get depressed.
I've just heard Philip Hammond on the radio bumbling through an interview about why wages haven't risen for ordinary workers over the past decade. He and Osborne are the problem. They were the ones who took growth out of the economy through their insane Austerity policies. And then the far Right moves in and says "Them f**king immigrants are what's keeping your living standards down".
It's the oldest story in politics. Goes back centuries. And have a guess who was the most successful exponent of that game (for a decade or so).
-
More workers spending every penny they have makes business and the economy grow, increase the wages of the low paid because they are the ones that will spend it and not squirrel it away.
-
AL
That is folksy common sense but it doesn't mesh with the real world.
It assumes an economy is static with a fixed amount of work to go round. That ain't how the real world works.
Study after study after study have shown that hard working immigrants grow economies faster than they take out. So there's more work available. And wages don't get depressed.
I've just heard Philip Hammond on the radio bumbling through an interview about why wages haven't risen for ordinary workers over the past decade. He and Osborne are the problem. They were the ones who took growth out of the economy through their insane Austerity policies. And then the far Right moves in and says "Them f**king immigrants are what's keeping your living standards down".
It's the oldest story in politics. Goes back centuries. And have a guess who was the most successful exponent of that game (for a decade or so).
What about all the ones here on the take though who have no intention of working, we've enough of our own on that game without importing them?
-
AL
1) So you've accepted the argument that working immigrants don't depress wages?
2) How many idle scrounging immigrants are there?
3) How much do they cost us?
4) How does that cost compare to the £150bn we've already lost from the Brexit vote, and the £1trn or so we're forecast to lose over the next decade?
-
Meanwhile, this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48451024
Head of the Society of Motor Manufacturers
"Today's figures are evidence of the vast cost and upheaval Brexit uncertainty has already wrought on UK automotive manufacturing businesses and workers.
"Prolonged instability has done untold damage, with the fear of 'no deal' holding back progress, causing investment to stall, jobs to be lost and undermining our global reputation."
Right lads. You've had your emotional spasm. You've bought into the bullshit from Farage and Rees-Mogg about the brave new world we could have with a hard Brexit. Don't you think it's time to start facing the consequences now?
-
Billy lad. Instead of searching endlessly on the internet for figures that support your argument, why don't you do a bit of your own research and walk round Doncaster town centre?
When you've done that get back to me.
I was going to suggest walking through Hexthorpe but somehow I don't think you've got that Kate Adie instinct.
-
Billy lad. Instead of searching endlessly on the internet for figures that support your argument, why don't you do a bit of your own research and walk round Doncaster town centre?
When you've done that get back to me.
I was going to suggest walking through Hexthorpe but somehow I don't think you've got that Kate Adie instinct.
How about you tell us BB instead of dog whistling?
-
Why so you can play your usual racist card?
Go and find out for yourself. Take Billy with you.
-
Why so you can play your usual racist card?
Go and find out for yourself. Take Billy with you.
https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/75269/area14mp/image-20150318-2502-hwp2kw.png
-
Good to see the EU election results spreading joy through the continent.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveWardGS/status/1132988677360103424
-
Could this be a problem? http://www.theweek.co.uk/101500/how-would-italy-s-parallel-currency-work
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1134207549249654786
Sooner or later it's going to sink in to the tiny group that insulated Corbyn from the real world.
Labour is in existential danger unless it unequivocally supports Ref2.
It doesn't matter what people claim about that losing them support. Labour has already lost more than half its support this year. By definition, it could not be worse.
It's bleeding obvious that the Tories are going to respond by electing a Hard Brexit PM. That will take them back up into the 30s. It is so painfully obvious what Labour must do. Politics is currently defined by Brexit. To wrong your hands and say "We support both sides" is a pathetic cop out. It's decision time. Now.
-
BST, why don't you put your 'Britain Surrendering Together' party into the Mix? You can get Suicidal Syd as your number 2 and bend over to Juncker & co and beg for forgiveness.
I can just see the headline now. Bend-Over Billy and Suicidal Syd restore British pride!
-
BB.
I much prefer you when you're funny.
-
BST. This is far too serious a subject to be funny.
Have you walked through Donny town centre with Suicidal Syd yet?
-
BST. This is far too serious a subject to be funny.
Have you walked through Donny town centre with Suicidal Syd yet?
You're sounding a bit desperate BB, I'll put it down to a tough week and I agree with BST you're funny side is best.
-
This is funny BB and a bit sad.
''Elton John: 'I am a European – not a stupid, imperialist English idiot''
''The singer says Brexit has made him ashamed to be British, while performing in Verona during his final world tour''
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/may/31/elton-john-brexit-not-imperialist-english-idiot-verona
-
I can't be doing with pop stars being political usually, but in dear old Elton's case, I might vote for him.
Is he still standing?
-
Yeah yeah yeah
-
This is funny BB and a bit sad.
''Elton John: 'I am a European – not a stupid, imperialist English idiot''
''The singer says Brexit has made him ashamed to be British, while performing in Verona during his final world tour''
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/may/31/elton-john-brexit-not-imperialist-english-idiot-verona
Guess what Reg? I'm ashamed you're British as well.
-
AL
2) How many idle scrounging immigrants are there?
3) How much do they cost us?
He'll just have to check with the Mail and the Express to answer those questions BST.
But I'm feeling generous, so I'll help him out
(https://i.imgur.com/MYv1yFA.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/g5bLcRL.jpg)
The worrying thing to me is that people like AL not only believe these lies, they propagate them. No wonder we're in the mess we are!
-
NNK. What is racist about wanting a points-based system based on migrants from all over the world?
-
NNK. What is racist about wanting a points-based system based on migrants from all over the world?
Where have I mentioned racism BB?
But if you want to talk about a points based system then a few questions.... Who sets the points? Who chooses the criteria for those points? Who ensures that the system is operated fairly?
Oh, and you are aware that non-EU immigration is higher that EU immigration aren't you?
Time to stop believing what you read in the Sun/Mail/Express or wherever you get your sound-bites from.
-
What's the collective noun for right wing ,sh1te publishing ,newspapers ?
-
NNW. So you're not suggesting that the Mail and Express front pages you show are racist?
-
Well played Elton John -
Sir Elton John has declared he is “ashamed” of the UK in an on-stage tirade about Brexit.
Before performing his hit “Believe” in Verona, Italy, Sir Elton launched into a rant about being “European” as opposed to a “colonial English idiot”.
He was filmed saying on Wednesday: “I’m compassionate, and I really believe that we need more love and compassion in the world today. A lot more.
“I am so sick to death of politicians, especially British politicians.“I am sick to death of Brexit. I am a European. I am not a stupid, colonial, imperialist English idiot.
-
AL
2) How many idle scrounging immigrants are there?
3) How much do they cost us?
He'll just have to check with the Mail and the Express to answer those questions BST.
But I'm feeling generous, so I'll help him out
(https://i.imgur.com/MYv1yFA.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/g5bLcRL.jpg)
The worrying thing to me is that people like AL not only believe these lies, they propagate them. No wonder we're in the mess we are!
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
-
NNW. So you're not suggesting that the Mail and Express front pages you show are racist?
BB. I'm suggesting that they are, at best grossly misleading, at worst downright lies. Neither more nor less.
-
So they're not racist then, sorted.
Now then, back to the points-based system. Let's reword it for you. What is wrong about wanting a points-based system based on migrants from all over the world, instead of one where European's get preference?
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
And how many people are here that shouldn't be, (real numbers, not the exaggerations/lies of the Sun/Mail/Express )?
Who determines who should be here and who shouldn't?
Why have successive governments failed to implement the border controls they always had the right to implement under EU rules but chose not to?
The problem isn't across the channel, it's right here, has been for years and years, and won't change when we leave the EU.
-
So they're not racist then, sorted.
Now then, back to the points-based system. Let's reword it for you. What is wrong about wanting a points-based system based on migrants from all over the world, instead of one where European's get preference?
Again, for the avoidance of doubt, I never brought up the subject of racism - you did!
And regarding a points based immigration system, I asked you three very pertinent questions. Care to answer them?
-
BB
In the (probably vain) hope that you'll engage with the core of the argument, you can't look at EU immigration in isolation. Free movement of labour is one of the core pillars of the single market.
The question (which was never really posed in 2016) is, does your wish to control movement of labour over-ride your wish to have the very great economic benefits of being a member of the richest single market in history?
That's really what the whole thing comes down to.
Is stopping more Poles and Slovaks coming to here worth sacrificing £1trn of economic activity over the next decade?
-
NNK. I don't recall you asking me three questions, but here goes.
And how many people are here that shouldn't be, (real numbers, not the exaggerations/lies of the Sun/Mail/Express )?
I suspect no one knows the exact figure, so I'm sure I don't!
Who determines who should be here and who shouldn't?
Probably nobody. Isn't it a free for all?
Why have successive governments failed to implement the border controls they always had the right to implement under EU rules but chose not to?
So the Mail and Express have a point then?
Didn't Tony Blair open the doors for everyone during his premiership?
-
Who sets the points? Who chooses the criteria for those points? Who ensures that the system is operated fairly?
The British Parliament of course!
Oh, and you are aware that non-EU immigration is higher that EU immigration aren't you?
Eu immigrants still get precedence.
Time to stop believing what you read in the Sun/Mail/Express or wherever you get your sound-bites from.
I only read them when people like you (who don't read them) put them in here.
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
And how many people are here that shouldn't be, (real numbers, not the exaggerations/lies of the Sun/Mail/Express )?
Who determines who should be here and who shouldn't?
Why have successive governments failed to implement the border controls they always had the right to implement under EU rules but chose not to?
The problem isn't across the channel, it's right here, has been for years and years, and won't change when we leave the EU.
The problem could be solved by electing a proper nationalist government who are prepared to look after our own and tell the do gooders at home and abroad where to get off.
-
BB
In the (probably vain) hope that you'll engage with the core of the argument, you can't look at EU immigration in isolation. Free movement of labour is one of the core pillars of the single market.
The question (which was never really posed in 2016) is, does your wish to control movement of labour over-ride your wish to have the very great economic benefits of being a member of the richest single market in history?
That's really what the whole thing comes down to.
Is stopping more Poles and Slovaks coming to here worth sacrificing £1trn of economic activity over the next decade?
[/quoteBB
In the (probably vain) hope that you'll engage with the core of the argument, you can't look at EU immigration in isolation. Free movement of labour is one of the core pillars of the single market.
The question (which was never really posed in 2016) is, does your wish to control movement of labour over-ride your wish to have the very great economic benefits of being a member of the richest single market in history?
That's really what the whole thing comes down to.
Is stopping more Poles and Slovaks coming to here worth sacrificing £1trn of economic activity over the next decade?
Nobody I know is against immigration. It is when it's not controlled that people question its worth. If a points system keeps out the freeloaders and criminals then everybody wins, don't they?
-
Well played Elton John -
Sir Elton John has declared he is “ashamed” of the UK in an on-stage tirade about Brexit.
Before performing his hit “Believe” in Verona, Italy, Sir Elton launched into a rant about being “European” as opposed to a “colonial English idiot”.
He was filmed saying on Wednesday: “I’m compassionate, and I really believe that we need more love and compassion in the world today. A lot more.
“I am so sick to death of politicians, especially British politicians.“I am sick to death of Brexit. I am a European. I am not a stupid, colonial, imperialist English idiot.
Oh yeah, super rich multi-millionaire Elton John with his glamorous life style is representative of working class people isn't he? Along with Bob Geldoff, Gary Lineker, and all those loudmouthed gobshites in Hollywood.
They can all f*ck off as far as I'm concerned.
-
NNK. I don't recall you asking me three questions,
The questions I asked you are in my reply to you on the previous page, but I'll repeat that here....
NNK. What is racist about wanting a points-based system based on migrants from all over the world?
Where have I mentioned racism BB?
But if you want to talk about a points based system then a few questions.... Who sets the points? Who chooses the criteria for those points? Who ensures that the system is operated fairly?
Oh, and you are aware that non-EU immigration is higher that EU immigration aren't you?
Time to stop believing what you read in the Sun/Mail/Express or wherever you get your sound-bites from.
You then wrote....
but here goes.
And how many people are here that shouldn't be, (real numbers, not the exaggerations/lies of the Sun/Mail/Express )?
I suspect no one knows the exact figure, so I'm sure I don't!
Who determines who should be here and who shouldn't?
Probably nobody. Isn't it a free for all?
Why have successive governments failed to implement the border controls they always had the right to implement under EU rules but chose not to?
So the Mail and Express have a point then?
Didn't Tony Blair open the doors for everyone during his premiership?
BB. to answer your three points above.
1. No one knows how many illegal immigrants there are in this country, even the government admit that. Which kind of proves the point that, until it is known how many illegal immigrants are here, the scale of any problem, (if indeed there is a problem), cannot be calculated. Of course, it doesn't stop the media speculating as those previously posted front pages show. Nor does it stop people drawing unsupportable conclusions from them.
2. No. it isn't a free for all, though again the media would make it seem so, and again it doesn't stop people drawing unsupportable conclusions from them. The principal reasons for illegal immigration are a) people entering the country legally but outstaying there entry visa, b) people entering the country illegally via the 'back door'. All other immigration is within the current rules as laid down by the government of the day.
3. No, Tony Blair did no such thing. Windrush was well before his time, and we were employing Indian and Pakistani immigrants back in the 60's - I know because I worked with them and latterly employed them in the 70's.
Now, to my three questions above?
Edited to say I see you found them and answered them, thank you. :)
-
Well played Elton John -
Sir Elton John has declared he is “ashamed” of the UK in an on-stage tirade about Brexit.
Before performing his hit “Believe” in Verona, Italy, Sir Elton launched into a rant about being “European” as opposed to a “colonial English idiot”.
He was filmed saying on Wednesday: “I’m compassionate, and I really believe that we need more love and compassion in the world today. A lot more.
“I am so sick to death of politicians, especially British politicians.“I am sick to death of Brexit. I am a European. I am not a stupid, colonial, imperialist English idiot.
Nope, sorry. You can be as compassionate, thoughtful and understanding as you want - but that still doesn't excuse all the rubbish you have unleashed on the world since 1975. (Although Blue Moves wasn't too bad).
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
And how many people are here that shouldn't be, (real numbers, not the exaggerations/lies of the Sun/Mail/Express )?
Who determines who should be here and who shouldn't?
Why have successive governments failed to implement the border controls they always had the right to implement under EU rules but chose not to?
The problem isn't across the channel, it's right here, has been for years and years, and won't change when we leave the EU.
The problem could be solved by electing a proper nationalist government who are prepared to look after our own and tell the do gooders at home and abroad where to get off.
I never knew you supported Nicola Sturgeon's ambitions.
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
Is this the green and pleasant land you were thinking of returning us back to?
He who turns to the left here from the main street, Long Millgate, is lost; he wanders from one court to another, turns countless corners, passes nothing but narrow, filthy nooks and alleys, until after a few minutes he has lost all clue, and knows not whither to turn. Everywhere half or wholly ruined buildings, some of them actually uninhabited, which means a great deal here; rarely a wooden or stone floor to be seen in the houses, almost uniformly broken, ill-fitting windows and doors, and a state of filth! Everywhere heaps of debris, refuse, and offal; standing pools for gutters, and a stench which alone would make it impossible for a human being in any degree civilised to live in such a district.
Frederick Engels - The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844
-
Some prime gammon on display these last few pages. Dear me.
-
Who sets the points? Who chooses the criteria for those points? Who ensures that the system is operated fairly?
The British Parliament of course!
Oh, and you are aware that non-EU immigration is higher that EU immigration aren't you?
Eu immigrants still get precedence.
Time to stop believing what you read in the Sun/Mail/Express or wherever you get your sound-bites from.
I only read them when people like you (who don't read them) put them in here.
BB. Thanks for responding.
So, do you actually believe, after the current showing regarding Brexit, that parliament could conceivably deliver and operate a fair points system? Unbelievable!
And, you ignored my other two questions, surprise surprise!
But if EU immigrants get preference then pray tell me why are there more non-EU immigrants than EU immigrants? I'd love to know as the system, portraid by you, is biassed against them.
As to your comment re the newspapers, if you only read them when someone posts a link to them I'd love to know where your repeated sound-bites come from. Care to elaborate?
-
Lads.
Do you have ANY idea how much contempt Farage has for you and your intelligence? How he and his paymasters think you are so f**king dense that they can fire off any shite at you and you will swallow it?
Here's the latest. They've given up any pretence at subtlety and are simply lying straight out at you now.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1134443104336003073
Watch that video clip.
It looks shocking doesn't it?
Hidden cameras catching Barnier unawares, talking about how they planned to use Ireland as a negotiating tool to get the deal they want.
The f**king nasty, evil, devious French Kitson.
Except.
Yeah, except that video was doctored from a recent documentary.
One that DIDN'T have hidden cameras. One where Barnier was filmed totally openly.
Someone at Arron Banks/Nigel Farage's Leave.EU has edited it to make it look like hidden cameras.
But they haven't edited the words. Barnier DID say exactly that. What they HAVE done is to cut out the bit where Barnier is saying that when they go into the negotiations they expected the BRITISH to use Ireland as a negotiating tool to get the deal they want.
Stop and think.
Why in God's name do you think they are doing this? Lying, openly and unashamedly. Presenting what looks like facts which are actually the total reverse.
Why do you think they are thinking YOU, you personally, and your mates who support Brexit are so f**king stupid that you will swallow this? Why they think you are so f**king thick that you will just accept this and not realise you're being lied to?
This is beyond partisanship now. This is beyond laughing off. If you see this and STILL support these people, you really do not care about truth and honesty. Support them if you want, but accept what it makes you.
-
I hope the BBC sues them for breach of copyright.
-
That barely scratches the point though Glyn does it?
These tactics are unprecedented. They're not even attempting to hide the lies now.
I'm genuinely gobsmacked at this. Everything the Leave side has done before has had a clever, clever semantic argument to be able to make the claim that they weren't really lying. And we know that works, because BB was defending it yesterday.
But this is totally different. This is taking something that's out there in public and deliberately and consciously presenting it as the opposite. To win a political argument.
No-one does this. It just does not happen. Ever.
But in an environment where people like SS and Selby and BB think everyone is lying (when they aren’t) I guess it makes sense to just lie even harder.
Even if you point out the lie, the people who want to listen to it will just say, "f**k it. It's MY side lying so I don't care."
-
I know, but the BBC doing it would get the real story of what they're up to all over the news.
-
Fair point.
Problem is, the BBC has shown no sign whatsoever of wanting to take the Leave side to task for their lying previously.
-
BST
What is it that makes you and your mates on here want to rant in favour of losing causes?
Oh, I get it; you in the minority are all brain boffins, and we in the majority are all thickheads.
That explains it all; I must have gone to the wrong university.
-
Because for most of my life Doncaster Rovers were a losing cause too, eh?
That's just my first guess though. I haven't yet started thinking about having principles and not changing them just because some crowing winner tells me to.
-
BST
What is it that makes you and your mates on here want to rant in favour of losing causes?
Oh, I get it; you in the minority are all brain boffins, and we in the majority are all thickheads.
That explains it all; I must have gone to the wrong university.
Steve we are all here because we support DR and we have varying views on Brexit which we all entitled to discus on the open forum. I don't speak for anyone else but it's hard to get away from the the plain and simple truth that the majority if not all credible economic experts are advising that the UK economy will suffer if we leave.
Those that wish to stay in the EU are continually inviting those that wish to leave to post credible sources that state an opposing view and apart from a few fringe topics the response has been zero, zilch, nada, although there has however been plenty of excuses as to why these credible article have not been posted.
The other part of the argument is that the Pro-EU camp has not stopped those that wish to brexit from doing so it's, because the government cannot get it's shit together. (others can provide a more technical explanation)
Any of this does not even touch the flawed process of getting to this point.
As I have said before, not necessarily directly to you but possible ................. if you want to win/end this debate you'll have to counter the above and no one has to date.
-
SS
Is that it? You see the contempt that Farage holds you in and you lash out at ME for pointing it out?
No. It's not ME thinking you are thick. It's the people you are voting for who think that. Evidently. They despise you.
I'm "ranting" about this because I love this country and it horrifies me that people like Farage and Banks (who have such contempt for the people of Doncaster that they serve up that sort of shit and expect you to believe it) might end up running this country.
Tell me. Simple straight answer. Does that video not concern you at all?
-
Billy. Do European migrants get preference over non-Europeans regarding entry into the UK?
-
SS
Is that it? You see the contempt that Farage holds you in and you lash out at ME for pointing it out?
No. It's not ME thinking you are thick. It's the people you are voting for who think that. Evidently. They despise you.
I'm "ranting" about this because I love this country and it horrifies me that people like Farage and Banks (who have such contempt for the people of Doncaster that they serve up that sort of shit and expect you to believe it) might end up running this country.
Tell me. Simple straight answer. Does that video not concern you at all?
If you love this country why do you want to fill it with foreigners?
Well I don't want them to live anywhere near me!
Why is it right that jobs can be advertised giving preference to Polish speakers in Britain? Would it happen the other way around over there?
-
BST
What is it that makes you and your mates on here want to rant in favour of losing causes?
Oh, I get it; you in the minority are all brain boffins, and we in the majority are all thickheads.
That explains it all; I must have gone to the wrong university.
Remainers are not brain boffins. They are people who recognise the benefits of remaining in the EU and the consequences of us leaving it. We also recognise the lies and undeliverable promises of the leave campaigns.
If leaving the EU is so good for the country then please tell us how we are going to be as well off as we are now let alone be better off when we leave.
And tell us how the Irish border issue can be resolved to the satisfaction of both halves.
It seems to me that many leavers have taken the fixed position of 'we voted leave so we must leave', no matter how much it will hurt them and the country!
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
Is this the green and pleasant land you were thinking of returning us back to?
He who turns to the left here from the main street, Long Millgate, is lost; he wanders from one court to another, turns countless corners, passes nothing but narrow, filthy nooks and alleys, until after a few minutes he has lost all clue, and knows not whither to turn. Everywhere half or wholly ruined buildings, some of them actually uninhabited, which means a great deal here; rarely a wooden or stone floor to be seen in the houses, almost uniformly broken, ill-fitting windows and doors, and a state of filth! Everywhere heaps of debris, refuse, and offal; standing pools for gutters, and a stench which alone would make it impossible for a human being in any degree civilised to live in such a district.
Frederick Engels - The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844
Well it's getting less green by the day as we rush to build more and more housing due to the unsustainable population growth.
The population crisis no-one wants to talk about which is an even bigger issue than Brexit. You only have to look at the rape of Auckley/Finningley by the builders. How much wildlife has been made homeless by the Amazon monstrosity?
-
BST
What is it that makes you and your mates on here want to rant in favour of losing causes?
Oh, I get it; you in the minority are all brain boffins, and we in the majority are all thickheads.
That explains it all; I must have gone to the wrong university.
Remainers are not brain boffins. They are people who recognise the benefits of remaining in the EU and the consequences of us leaving it. We also recognise the lies and undeliverable promises of the leave campaigns.
If leaving the EU is so good for the country then please tell us how we are going to be as well off as we are now let alone be better off when we leave.
And tell us how the Irish border issue can be resolved to the satisfaction of both halves.
It seems to me that many leavers have taken the fixed position of 'we voted leave so we must leave', no matter how much it will hurt them and the country!
No-one knows if we will be better or worse off because it hasn't happened.
The Irish border is not our problem. The EU are the ones who are making an issue of it.
-
Billy. Do European migrants get preference over non-Europeans regarding entry into the UK?
At the moment we are full members of the EU. As such there is freedom of movement between all EU countries, them's the rules. In terms of employment, it is down to the individual employer to determine who to employ and one would hope that employers will pick the best candidate irrespective of race, colour, sex etc.
We, as a nation, benefit from that freedom of movement; both with relevantly skilled Europeans coming here to work and Britons going to EU countries to work or to retire to France, Spain, Italy etc - it's a two way street that benefits all parties, it's not them versus us FFS! Though the media would have the gullible think otherwise.
-
BST
What is it that makes you and your mates on here want to rant in favour of losing causes?
Oh, I get it; you in the minority are all brain boffins, and we in the majority are all thickheads.
That explains it all; I must have gone to the wrong university.
Remainers are not brain boffins. They are people who recognise the benefits of remaining in the EU and the consequences of us leaving it. We also recognise the lies and undeliverable promises of the leave campaigns.
If leaving the EU is so good for the country then please tell us how we are going to be as well off as we are now let alone be better off when we leave.
And tell us how the Irish border issue can be resolved to the satisfaction of both halves.
It seems to me that many leavers have taken the fixed position of 'we voted leave so we must leave', no matter how much it will hurt them and the country!
No-one knows if we will be better or worse off because it hasn't happened.
The Irish border is not our problem. The EU are the ones who are making an issue of it.
I see you choose to ignore the experts who tell us we will be worse off when we leave, no change there. But you can't ignore that fact that, as a country, we are already all worse off than we were before the vote - and we haven't even left yet!
As to the Irish border, wasn't it us as part of the leave campaigns who wanted to 'take back control of our borders'? To do that we have to have a border, and that is clearly down to us.
Come on AL, you must be able to come up with some tangible benefits of us leaving the EU; after all, you wouldn't have voted leave if you couldn't see any tangible benefits - well, unless you fell for the lies and guff of the leave campaigns! £350M/week for the NHS perhaps?
-
To make business with the rest of the world rather than be shackled to the rules of foreign governments. I know you will say we agreed to the rules but our politicians have been on the Westminster/Brussels gravy train for too long. They would rather appease the faceless ones in ultimate power than look after the British people.
I would love to see a no deal Brexit just for the joy of seeing the German car industry take a massive hit.
-
Billy. Do European migrants get preference over non-Europeans regarding entry into the UK?
At the moment we are full members of the EU. As such there is freedom of movement between all EU countries, them's the rules. In terms of employment, it is down to the individual employer to determine who to employ and one would hope that employers will pick the best candidate irrespective of race, colour, sex etc.
We, as a nation, benefit from that freedom of movement; both with relevantly skilled Europeans coming here to work and Britons going to EU countries to work or to retire to France, Spain, Italy etc - it's a two way street that benefits all parties, it's not them versus us FFS! Though the media would have the gullible think otherwise.
That wasn't the question. The question was do EU migrants get preference over non-EU's regarding entry into the UK? The answer is that they do.
I asked your leader the question because you would have believed him more than me. Alas, as usual, he only answers my questions when it suits.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45634901
-
BB
I didn't answer it because it's a question, the answer to which is so bleeding obvious, I thought you were posing it rhetorically.
Of course it's easier for people from the EU to migrate here than people from outside the EU. As I said, that's one of the requirements of membership of the richest single market in human history.
Happy?
Good.
-
Yes Billy, I'm happy with that answer. I'm not sure NNK will be though, he's been denying it for a day or two.
-
Right.
Fascinating to see not a peep from any Leave supporter about that Leave.EU video.
Anybody?
Anything to add?
-
To make business with the rest of the world rather than be shackled to the rules of foreign governments. I know you will say we agreed to the rules but our politicians have been on the Westminster/Brussels gravy train for too long. They would rather appease the faceless ones in ultimate power than look after the British people.
I would love to see a no deal Brexit just for the joy of seeing the German car industry take a massive hit.
More guff from the likes of the daily mail, no substance whatsoever. So, no tangible benefits, just bile and a hate of them foriners! Typical Brexiter!
-
Billy. Do European migrants get preference over non-Europeans regarding entry into the UK?
At the moment we are full members of the EU. As such there is freedom of movement between all EU countries, them's the rules. In terms of employment, it is down to the individual employer to determine who to employ and one would hope that employers will pick the best candidate irrespective of race, colour, sex etc.
We, as a nation, benefit from that freedom of movement; both with relevantly skilled Europeans coming here to work and Britons going to EU countries to work or to retire to France, Spain, Italy etc - it's a two way street that benefits all parties, it's not them versus us FFS! Though the media would have the gullible think otherwise.
That wasn't the question. The question was do EU migrants get preference over non-EU's regarding entry into the UK? The answer is that they do.
I asked your leader the question because you would have believed him more than me. Alas, as usual, he only answers my questions when it suits.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45634901
It's nothing to do with preference, it's to do with the rules of freedom of movement within the club. If you have difficulty in understanding that then there's no help for you.
-
Yes Billy, I'm happy with that answer. I'm not sure NNK will be though, he's been denying it for a day or two.
Wrong, as usual BB.
-
To make business with the rest of the world rather than be shackled to the rules of foreign governments. I know you will say we agreed to the rules but our politicians have been on the Westminster/Brussels gravy train for too long. They would rather appease the faceless ones in ultimate power than look after the British people.
I would love to see a no deal Brexit just for the joy of seeing the German car industry take a massive hit.
More guff from the likes of the daily mail, no substance whatsoever. So, no tangible benefits, just bile and a hate of them foriners! Typical Brexiter!
Aaaaaaannnnnnnndddddddd here we go again with the racist card!
-
Yes Billy, I'm happy with that answer. I'm not sure NNK will be though, he's been denying it for a day or two.
Wrong, as usual BB.
Don't worry about it NNK, at least you admit it.
-
To make business with the rest of the world rather than be shackled to the rules of foreign governments. I know you will say we agreed to the rules but our politicians have been on the Westminster/Brussels gravy train for too long. They would rather appease the faceless ones in ultimate power than look after the British people.
I would love to see a no deal Brexit just for the joy of seeing the German car industry take a massive hit.
More guff from the likes of the daily mail, no substance whatsoever. So, no tangible benefits, just bile and a hate of them foriners! Typical Brexiter!
Aaaaaaannnnnnnndddddddd here we go again with the racist card!
You are the one who brings up racism on a regular basis BB, do you have some sort of issue? It's quite clear that my post was questioning AL's motives in taking joy from seeing the German car industry take a massive hit. The fact that it won't of course shows the bile that AL seems to have against foriners.
And for the avoidance of doubt, (you seem to need things spelling out for some reason), I use the word foriners as a parody of the word foreigners as typical of the expressed attitude of many leave voters I know personally. But if you want an example of things that incite racism, be my guest....
(https://i.imgur.com/KQgVYpd.jpg)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants
-
The real cause of racism is walking through towns and cities and seeing the hatred and resentment that some foriners show to us. NOT posters.
-
Yes Billy, I'm happy with that answer. I'm not sure NNK will be though, he's been denying it for a day or two.
Wrong, as usual BB.
Don't worry about it NNK, at least you admit it.
It's clear that, notwithstanding any explanation, you just don't get it.
-
The real cause of racism is walking through towns and cities and seeing the hatred and resentment that some foriners show to us. NOT posters.
Really? Do you have examples you can post?
-
Go round Donny town centre and see for yourself.
-
Maybe it's just you they show hatred and resentment to BB. I've never seen it shown to me.
-
Maybe it's all them £20 notes you keep giving them.
-
To make business with the rest of the world rather than be shackled to the rules of foreign governments. I know you will say we agreed to the rules but our politicians have been on the Westminster/Brussels gravy train for too long. They would rather appease the faceless ones in ultimate power than look after the British people.
I would love to see a no deal Brexit just for the joy of seeing the German car industry take a massive hit.
What 'massive hit' are they going to take? Lose sales in the UK because their cars are going to be more expensive here? I'm sure the extra sales they'll make in 27 other countries because UK manufactured cars are going to be more expensive in those countries will help dry their tears.
-
This country is vastly overpopulated. FACT
Getting rid of people who shouldn't be here should the first step in putting this right and returning this country into a green and pleasant land it once was, rather than the grey, concrete, scum ridden, shithole it has become thanks to the likes of Tony Blair teaching us all a lesson.
Is this the green and pleasant land you were thinking of returning us back to?
He who turns to the left here from the main street, Long Millgate, is lost; he wanders from one court to another, turns countless corners, passes nothing but narrow, filthy nooks and alleys, until after a few minutes he has lost all clue, and knows not whither to turn. Everywhere half or wholly ruined buildings, some of them actually uninhabited, which means a great deal here; rarely a wooden or stone floor to be seen in the houses, almost uniformly broken, ill-fitting windows and doors, and a state of filth! Everywhere heaps of debris, refuse, and offal; standing pools for gutters, and a stench which alone would make it impossible for a human being in any degree civilised to live in such a district.
Frederick Engels - The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844
Well it's getting less green by the day as we rush to build more and more housing due to the unsustainable population growth.
The population crisis no-one wants to talk about which is an even bigger issue than Brexit. You only have to look at the rape of Auckley/Finningley by the builders. How much wildlife has been made homeless by the Amazon monstrosity?
I think you will find that there is a heck of a lot of discussion going on about the effect of population growth, health, housing, social care etc - you must be reading the wrong newspapers/websites.
But what has where new houses/industries are built got to do with the EU? There are 600000 empty houses in the UK because of property speculators and people with 2nd or 3rd homes. That's UK law and nothing to do with Brussels.
https://www.housebeautiful.com/uk/lifestyle/property/a25261859/vacant-homes-england/
Same with Amazon. Sweden doesn't allow Amazon to operate from Sweden because they want to promote and protect local business. Sweden is in the EU. If the UK government prefers a multi-national organisation to under-cut local shops and business whilst only paying a minimal amount of tax, that's down to the UK government.
https://www.politico.eu/article/sweden-amazon-competition-ecommerce/
Why do you think there will be less building and greater environmental protection if we leave the EU? People like Farage and Johnson have already said they want to scrap EU environmental regulation and allow more house building.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/926940/Brexit-news-eu-laws-scrapped-Oliver-Letwin-European-Union
-
Not a word about this then? No-one bothered about Farage's mob considering their supporters to be just fodder to be lied to and manipulated?
Lads.
Do you have ANY idea how much contempt Farage has for you and your intelligence? How he and his paymasters think you are so f**king dense that they can fire off any shite at you and you will swallow it?
Here's the latest. They've given up any pretence at subtlety and are simply lying straight out at you now.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1134443104336003073
Watch that video clip.
It looks shocking doesn't it?
Hidden cameras catching Barnier unawares, talking about how they planned to use Ireland as a negotiating tool to get the deal they want.
The f**king nasty, evil, devious French Kitson.
Except.
Yeah, except that video was doctored from a recent documentary.
One that DIDN'T have hidden cameras. One where Barnier was filmed totally openly.
Someone at Arron Banks/Nigel Farage's Leave.EU has edited it to make it look like hidden cameras.
But they haven't edited the words. Barnier DID say exactly that. What they HAVE done is to cut out the bit where Barnier is saying that when they go into the negotiations they expected the BRITISH to use Ireland as a negotiating tool to get the deal they want.
Stop and think.
Why in God's name do you think they are doing this? Lying, openly and unashamedly. Presenting what looks like facts which are actually the total reverse.
Why do you think they are thinking YOU, you personally, and your mates who support Brexit are so f**king stupid that you will swallow this? Why they think you are so f**king thick that you will just accept this and not realise you're being lied to?
This is beyond partisanship now. This is beyond laughing off. If you see this and STILL support these people, you really do not care about truth and honesty. Support them if you want, but accept what it makes you.
-
Farage still going on about insurance based healthcare. Yeah, let's do the thing that bankrupts people in America and people avoid going for healthcare because of the cost implications. Let's not look at which countries have the best health records.
Ann Widdecombe is today hoping science can explain homosexuality and who knows, we might find a cure?
Sam Gyimah sounding like the sanest Tory member around at the moment. Nothings getting through so to break the impasse we have a two stage vote. Remain or Leave then the different types of Leave if that wins. This should have been done from day 1.
-
Eh well. I see it didn't take long in the spotlight for this stupid bigoted idiot to remind us of her idiotic bigoted stupidity did it?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48491731
-
Well, talking about objective truth.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48491602
So let me see.
Trump lies about what he said in a recorded interview.
Farage's organisation puts out demonstrably lying tweets about EU negotiators.
Johnson has made a career of lying about everything from EU bananas to £350m/week.
Trump thinks Farage and Johnson should be the ones running the country.
Do you see a pattern here?
Anyone?
Or, more to the point, do you actually care?
-
No, BST, they don't. Winning is the only thing that matters.
-
As the titanic goes down the band strikes up one last chorus of :
we won - you lost get over it.
they need us more than we need them ( pause for laughter )
the German car industry will crumble from the massive hit
( on the less than 7% of German car sales to the uk )
a truly pitiful sight.
-
Actually it’s 14% of all German Car Production not 7 % get your facts right !
-
Actually it’s 14% of all German Car Production not 7 % get your facts right !
What percentage of German car sales is it though? That's the figure that foxbat was talking about.
-
It’s 14% of the entire motor car production of the German car industry
-
1 in 7 Cars manufactured in Germany are sold to the UK
-
Sproty.
That's correct, but you need a little context.
The entire EU car exports to the UK amount to about 0.15% of the EU27 GDP.
Britain's car exports to the EU, on the other hand amount to about 0.5% of our GDP.
The EU can take a hit on that trade far better than we can. And here's the really important fact. The EU economy would suffer far more by compromising the Single Market (which is what the right wing flat-earthers are effectively asking them to do) than they would by losing sales to us. Unless you get that point, you're always going to misunderstand what drives the EU's negotiating stance.
Yes we are important. But we're not THAT important. That's the key.
-
That’s interesting, you you don’t get the point I was referring to the effects on the German Car Market. Not the little fish like Austria and the like.
The Germans will take the big hit. So Why are Cretins from the backwoods, ie Luxembourg and Poland calling the shots
-
Not much point discussing this if you're coming with that attitude.
-
1 in 7 Cars manufactured in Germany are sold to the UK
How many cars sold in the UK are manufactured in Germany or manufactured by German owned firms in the UK? Or French? Or Spanish?
Or put another way, with Honda and Toyota ceasing manufacturing in the UK if we don't by EU manufactured cars what will we buy?
-
It's not my problem, the Eu will be punishing itself with a hard Brexit, and while we're at it we ban them fom fishing our waters and make over 100. K unemployed, then we sell them their much loved fish at premium rates.,easy peasey. Oh and don't rabbit on about us importing Cod from Holland et al, our boats will land the Cod and process it in our Fish productuin facillities.
-
Jesus wept. How on earth do we row back from here when intelligent folk have had their brains addled to this extent my a generation of bile?
-
It's not my problem, the Eu will be punishing itself with a hard Brexit, and while we're at it we ban them fom fishing our waters and make over 100. K unemployed, then we sell them their much loved fish at premium rates.,easy peasey. Oh and don't rabbit on about us importing Cod from Holland et al, our boats will land the Cod and process it in our Fish productuin facillities.
The UK has already sold it's fishing quotas to foreign big businesses for quick dosh. We can't ban them, we've already sold them the exclusive rights to fish there. That's the UK that's done that, not the EU. Got it?
-
It's not my problem, the Eu will be punishing itself with a hard Brexit, and while we're at it we ban them fom fishing our waters and make over 100. K unemployed, then we sell them their much loved fish at premium rates.,easy peasey. Oh and don't rabbit on about us importing Cod from Holland et al, our boats will land the Cod and process it in our Fish productuin facillities.
Sproty
The EU doesn't want us to leave at all.
We have to have negotiated fishing rights in or out of the EU and as GW points out there are existing contracts in place which a lot have been sold to overseas interests.
It will be your problem if Farage and Johnson are allowed to run the asylum.
Finish your homework or you can't have any supper.
''More than a quarter of the United Kingdom’s fishing quota is in the hands of a tiny group of the country’s wealthiest families, an Unearthed investigation has found.
Just five families on the Sunday Times Rich List hold or control 29% of the UK’s fishing quota''
''It reveals that more than two-thirds of the UK’s fishing quota is controlled by just 25 businesses – and more than half of those are linked to one of the biggest criminal overfishing scams ever to reach the British courts.
Meanwhile, in England nearly 80% of fishing quota is held by foreign owners or domestic Rich List families, and more than half of Northern Ireland’s quota is hoarded onto a single trawler''
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/10/11/fishing-quota-uk-defra-michael-gove/
More homework:
Common Fisheries Policy
''The UK's share of the overall EU fishing catch in 2014 was 752,000 tonnes, the second largest catch of any country in the EU''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Fisheries_Policy
Yet more:
http://theconversation.com/brexit-what-the-uk-fishing-industry-wants-107751
-
20% of the fish we collect aren't from UK waters. If they're fish don't native to us and perhaps to e.g. the Mediterranean then some nice tariffs on then. Also, 80% of the fish we collect is sold on to other countries, of the top 5 of those countries 4 of the are in the EU. Some of the fisheries laws the EU have ended up making the cod numbers increase after reducing for decades. So all in all, we don't need that many fish and if they want some they'll go to the cheapest seller and seeing as these fish aren't only in our waters, they're in Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch and German waters they'll find competitors.
-
20% of the fish we collect aren't from UK waters. If they're fish don't native to us and perhaps to e.g. the Mediterranean then some nice tariffs on then. Also, 80% of the fish we collect is sold on to other countries, of the top 5 of those countries 4 of the are in the EU. Some of the fisheries laws the EU have ended up making the cod numbers increase after reducing for decades. So all in all, we don't need that many fish and if they want some they'll go to the cheapest seller and seeing as these fish aren't only in our waters, they're in Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch and German waters they'll find competitors.
60% of eu fish stocks are in U.K. And Eire waters!
-
Sproty.
Grand. Let's take back control.of our waters and kick them thieving foreigners out.
A report a year or two back suggested that, over time, the UK fisheries industry could grow so big that it would add nearly £700m/year to our economy.
That would be brilliant! At that rate, it would only take 140 years to make up the economic output we've lost because of the sharp downturn in our economy since the 2016 vote.
Happy days!
-
And here's the final act of the play.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-race-lead_uk_5cf54ee7e4b0e346ce826899?kyr
This is your next PM.
Remember, you lot who voted Leave. THIS is what it was all about.
f**k all to do with taking back control.
All about Boris's ambitions.
Cameron's insecurity about Boris leading a Eurosceptic challenge from the right was the reason we had a referendum in the first place.
Then, remember this. Remember this about the man who passionately led the Leave campaign, shouting "Take Back Control". The man you lot supported.
Remember this.
When the referendum was called, he went silent for two weeks.
Do you know what he was doing?
He was holed up with his closest advisers, war gaming whether supporting Leave or Remain would be better for his chances of becoming PM.
He wrote two impassioned speeches.
One supporting Leave.
One supporting Remain.
Remember that over the next decade as our economy gently declines relative to the rest of the world. Remember as money is taken out of your pensions and your grandkids' schools.
Remember what it was all about. And how you were played by an Eton and Bullingdon schemer.
-
And here's the final act of the play.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-race-lead_uk_5cf54ee7e4b0e346ce826899?kyr
This is your next PM.
Remember, you lot who voted Leave. THIS is what it was all about.
f**k all to do with taking back control.
All about Boris's ambitions.
Cameron's insecurity about Boris leading a Eurosceptic challenge from the right was the reason we had a referendum in the first place.
Then, remember this. Remember this about the man who passionately led the Leave campaign, shouting "Take Back Control". The man you lot supported.
Remember this.
When the referendum was called, he went silent for two weeks.
Do you know what he was doing?
He was holed up with his closest advisers, war gaming whether supporting Leave or Remain would be better for his chances of becoming PM.
He wrote two impassioned speeches.
One supporting Leave.
One supporting Remain.
Remember that over the next decade as our economy gently declines relative to the rest of the world. Remember as money is taken out of your pensions and your grandkids' schools.
Remember what it was all about. And how you were played by an Eton and Bullingdon schemer.
Yeah but sovereignty
-
20% of the fish we collect aren't from UK waters. If they're fish don't native to us and perhaps to e.g. the Mediterranean then some nice tariffs on then. Also, 80% of the fish we collect is sold on to other countries, of the top 5 of those countries 4 of the are in the EU. Some of the fisheries laws the EU have ended up making the cod numbers increase after reducing for decades. So all in all, we don't need that many fish and if they want some they'll go to the cheapest seller and seeing as these fish aren't only in our waters, they're in Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch and German waters they'll find competitors.
60% of eu fish stocks are in U.K. And Eire waters!
Who told you that, Leave.EU?
-
And here's the final act of the play.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-race-lead_uk_5cf54ee7e4b0e346ce826899?kyr
This is your next PM.
Remember, you lot who voted Leave. THIS is what it was all about.
f**k all to do with taking back control.
All about Boris's ambitions.
Cameron's insecurity about Boris leading a Eurosceptic challenge from the right was the reason we had a referendum in the first place.
Then, remember this. Remember this about the man who passionately led the Leave campaign, shouting "Take Back Control". The man you lot supported.
Remember this.
When the referendum was called, he went silent for two weeks.
Do you know what he was doing?
He was holed up with his closest advisers, war gaming whether supporting Leave or Remain would be better for his chances of becoming PM.
He wrote two impassioned speeches.
One supporting Leave.
One supporting Remain.
Remember that over the next decade as our economy gently declines relative to the rest of the world. Remember as money is taken out of your pensions and your grandkids' schools.
Remember what it was all about. And how you were played by an Eton and Bullingdon schemer.
Yeah but sovereignty
Sovereignty, eh?
https://www.sustainweb.org/news/feb19_fish_QandA/
-
good analysis there BST. save a copy to repost in a couple of years time , if the county persists with this lunacy, for the ' we won - get over it ' brigade to ponder.
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
-
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1136517706243424256?s=19 (https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1136517706243424256?s=19)
This guy's a traitor to Brexit.
-
The most ignored leaving deal is Lexit. I am sick of being stuck with tags of association with "Tommy" Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon "Robinson" of EDL and UKIP infamy. No I wasn't too thick and therefore was taken in by phony immigration threats. I know the EU is not reformable and is a rich right wing club. Interestingly French train drivers are up in arms about plans to privatise SNCF as its all about market competition. We need a system where we can renationalise rail, water gas and electric - all popular with the public mood (train fares rising again in January to subsidise rail franchise profiteers- including the Dutch and German state railways).
''And if you think the EU protects workers rights you are dreaming back in the era of Delores, as consecutive UK, with no intervention from the EU, governments have eroded them further. We need to leave with the best deal possible for UK workers and rights''
I thought Brexit was taking back control sovereignty and all that? but here you are claiming that the EU hasn't got control, you can't have it both ways Sheff.
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
And in March Ford announced it was making 5000 redundancies in Germany and closing a factory in France.
-
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1136517706243424256?s=19 (https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1136517706243424256?s=19)
This guy's a traitor to Brexit.
Yea, that lying t**t Cameron, alluding to the increased risk to the peace we have enjoyed for the last 70 years if we were to leave Europe. Lying scheming t**t!! What the f**k does he know!!!
-
Pies.
Hang on. Hang on.
You're wrong there. Cameron didn't say that. He said that if we voted Leave, we would have WWIII. I know he said that because several people on here have insisted that he said that.
-
As D P Gumby once said (at least I think it was him) "My brain hurts"
-
''https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/06/next-tory-pm-will-not-be-able-to-suspend-parliament-bercow''
''Speaker says it is ‘blindingly obvious’ that no-deal Brexit cannot happen without vote''
I would think this finally kills off a no-deal wreckit.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/06/next-tory-pm-will-not-be-able-to-suspend-parliament-bercow
''Brexit: John Bercow rejects ending Commons session to force no deal''
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48541352
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
-
Ford say the closure was part if a restructuring plan across Europe, workers interviewed yesterday on telly said the closure had been expected for a decade, industry analysts commented that the move to electric cars meant fewer engines were needed and Ford are making redundancies and closures across Europe. To blame this (and it seems every other business closure) on Brexit is wrong but unfortunately to be expected in some quarters
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
Stuart Rowley, President of Ford Europe “This action has nothing to do with Brexit and the simple way to think of it is, if Brexit had never happened would there be a different decision, and the answer to that is no.”
Remainers: “I don’t believe it.”
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
Stuart Rowley, President of Ford Europe “This action has nothing to do with Brexit and the simple way to think of it is, if Brexit had never happened would there be a different decision, and the answer to that is no.”
Remainers: “I don’t believe it.”
So the economy has nothing to do with the ''restructuring"?
-
Brexit: stop talking up no-deal, Tory leadership candidates told:
''Human rights organisation, workers’ unions, representatives of rural communities and a dozen other organisations are writing to all the candidates to succeed Theresa May to warn them no deal would have a “devastating impact” on the social cohesion in border areas''
''Louise Coyle, director of the Northern Ireland Rural Women’s Network and one of the signatories to the statement, says:
''members feel that Westminster politicians “have very little understanding” of Northern Ireland, with supporters of a no-deal Brexit – such as members of the European Research Group – devising plans for “alternative arrangements”:
''THAT HAVE NO BASIS IN REALITY''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/07/stop-talking-up-no-deal-brexit-tory-leadership-candidates-told
We get back to that nagging question over and over again, in who's best interest is brexit, the proponents or you?
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
Stuart Rowley, President of Ford Europe “This action has nothing to do with Brexit and the simple way to think of it is, if Brexit had never happened would there be a different decision, and the answer to that is no.”
Remainers: “I don’t believe it.”
You're absolutely right HA, Brexit had nothing whatsoever to do with that decision. In fact, Brexit has had nothing to do with British Steel or indeed any of the other ills that have befallen the UK since the vote to leave.
We are also going to give the NHS the £350M a week we send to the EU, it said so on the side of a bus, and BJ said so too.
The reason our GDP is lower than it should be is nothing to do with Brexit, Farage said so.
In fact all our problems are down to the EU. It's all their fault. We should leave, now. And if things get worse it either would have happened anyway or it will be the fault of the EU - I read it all in the Daily Mail.
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
Stuart Rowley, President of Ford Europe “This action has nothing to do with Brexit and the simple way to think of it is, if Brexit had never happened would there be a different decision, and the answer to that is no.”
Remainers: “I don’t believe it.”
You're absolutely right HA, Brexit had nothing whatsoever to do with that decision. In fact, Brexit has had nothing to do with British Steel or indeed any of the other ills that have befallen the UK since the vote to leave.
We are also going to give the NHS the £350M a week we send to the EU, it said so on the side of a bus, and BJ said so too.
The reason our GDP is lower than it should be is nothing to do with Brexit, Farage said so.
In fact all our problems are down to the EU. It's all their fault. We should leave, now. And if things get worse it either would have happened anyway or it will be the fault of the EU - I read it all in the Daily Mail.
NNK
Come on! Look at it this way
The Head of Ford Europe says it’s not Brexit
The workers said this has been in the cards for years
Industry commentators say this is due to worldwide economics and changing demand
Even larger redundancies are taking place across Europe
And yet, despite this you insist on blaming Brexit? Tell me, who did you blame in 2005 when MG Longbridge closed?
Look, if Brexit was to blame then I’d be absolutely holding that candle. But it isn’t and that’s that
-
It's clearly not Brexit that has led to this, but the ongoing slowdown in sales of conventional engine cars.
-
Fair play to all those Brexiteers who said the German car industry would loose jobs over Brexit, well fair play to you - you were right again. Ford is closing its engine plant at Bridgend with the loss of 2000 jobs. Congratulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/7901282a-87b6-11e9-97ea-05ac2431f453
Have ford not said it’s nothing to do with brexit?
''The former Wales first minister Carwyn Jones, the assembly member for Bridgend, turned up at the plant to offer support to sacked workers. He believes the threat of a no-deal Brexit has played a part in Ford’s decision''
“I think the worry of the impact of a no deal has played its part. It might have made Ford reassess its investment strategy in the UK. That’s the tragedy for the workers. All that is happening in Westminster, the climate it creates, has an outcome for the workers here. My focus now is to keep this plant open if at all possible. I’ll fight for it.”
With an ever dwindling amount of money in people's pockets due to brexit coma and Austrerity it's no wonder ford are pulling out BP
Stuart Rowley, President of Ford Europe “This action has nothing to do with Brexit and the simple way to think of it is, if Brexit had never happened would there be a different decision, and the answer to that is no.”
Remainers: “I don’t believe it.”
You're absolutely right HA, Brexit had nothing whatsoever to do with that decision. In fact, Brexit has had nothing to do with British Steel or indeed any of the other ills that have befallen the UK since the vote to leave.
We are also going to give the NHS the £350M a week we send to the EU, it said so on the side of a bus, and BJ said so too.
The reason our GDP is lower than it should be is nothing to do with Brexit, Farage said so.
In fact all our problems are down to the EU. It's all their fault. We should leave, now. And if things get worse it either would have happened anyway or it will be the fault of the EU - I read it all in the Daily Mail.
NNK
Come on! Look at it this way
The Head of Ford Europe says it’s not Brexit
The workers said this has been in the cards for years
Industry commentators say this is due to worldwide economics and changing demand
Even larger redundancies are taking place across Europe
And yet, despite this you insist on blaming Brexit? Tell me, who did you blame in 2005 when MG Longbridge closed?
Look, if Brexit was to blame then I’d be absolutely holding that candle. But it isn’t and that’s that
HA. I though the tongue-in-cheek nature of my post would have been the giveaway! I was parodying how some Brexiters on here respond to facts.
Having said that, whilst I fully accept that Brexit was not the cause of fords decision to close a rather old factory, I can't believe that it wasn't one of the considerations in arriving at that decision.
The change in demand part is interesting though. Yes, there is a definite move away from fossil fuel driven vehicles, (so far as direct propulsion is concerned - electricity will continue to be produced by fossil fuel, at least in part, for a long time yet), but demand for petrol/diesel powered vehicles will continue for quite some time. There are a number of reasons for this, not least that electric power is in its infancy so far as motor vehicles are concerned, the infrastructure to support them isn't there in sufficient volume, there are parts of the world where the technology is inappropriate or unaffordable etc etc. This demand will require to be fulfilled and, unless Ford has plans for a new design of engine, (I have no idea whether they do or not), those same engines will have to be built somewhere. If that is so then cost has to have been a factor taken into consideration. Given that we seem to be evermore moving towards a No Deal situation, (either by default or desire), the costs of producing those engines in the UK will have been part of those considerations; and those costs would certainly be significantly higher after a hard Brexit - and then there's likely customs delays, paperwork etc! All of which would have an effect.
As to Longbridge, it suffered much in the same way as Leyland and others before them - lack of investment, poor management and diabolical industrial relations, (from both sides). A malaise common in British industry - and on this I speak from much experience!
-
NNK
If I mis interpreted the message and tone of your post then I apologise
-
NNK
If I mis interpreted the message and tone of your post then I apologise
No problem HA, and no apology needed. I don't always get what I'm trying to put over right, I should have used a smiley or two. :blush:
-
That’s a lesson for a few posters on here of how to resolve a potential misunderstanding.
Well done chaps.👍🙂
-
Gove says he will scrap VAT and sprinkle some fairy dust around we'll all live happily ever after.
Sunday Tele
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-the-papers-48570896
While the Sunday Mirror says most of them are dopes.
-
Angel dust, surely?
-
Angel dust, surely?
hehe
-
Fantastic news!
After 3 years, we've finally signed a draft free trade agreement with a major economy. The agreement with South Korea will kick in after Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48577667
"The agreement is roughly in line with the terms of the existing Korea-EU FTA."
Remind me again. What was Brexit supposed to be about?
-
Fantastic news!
After 3 years, we've finally signed a draft free trade agreement with a major economy. The agreement with South Korea will kick in after Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48577667
"The agreement is roughly in line with the terms of the existing Korea-EU FTA."
Remind me again. What was Brexit supposed to be about?
"The deal is significant as it eased uncertainties sparked by Brexit, amid the already challenging environment for exports on the escalating trade row between Washington and Beijing," Ms Yoo said.
South Korea - Asia's fourth largest economy - is a global leader in electronics, steel and auto industry.
SK will help supply the cars and steel we will no longer make?
-
Meanwhile. Now the Brexit-panic stockpiling boost to GDP has stopped...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1TB0VU
-
This guy sums up pretty accurately, in 96 seconds, where we as a country are right now.
https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/06/10/this-96-second-take-on-the-state-of-english-politics-went-viral-because-it-nails-it-so-well/?fbclid=IwAR3YhnGE0OZyLNSCP_N2xFmTtV0vAG8tg33e3rAcW0z00kFput0DbdDCNt8&tb_cb=2
-
In the latest installment of the world has gone mad and you just don't know what is actual news or fake news - Oliver Letwin and all the other party leaders (apart from the DUP) have joined Corbyn in signing an official Labour motion to be debated tomorrow to allow parliament to block a No Deal Brexit.
That's confirmed marxist and IRA terrorist Jeremy Corbyn and the man who devised the Poll Tax for Margaret Thatcher and was David Cameron's fixer, putting a joint motion to Parliament.
And if you don't know why that is amazing - google it.
-
Well now.
All this talk about how Brexit is all about supporting democracy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/1138391996349984768
Just stop and think.
45% of Leave supporters and 43% of Conservative voters would support the unprecedented action of the PM asking the Queen to close down Parliament at the end of October, in order to stop MPs blocking a No Deal.
7% of each of those would support that even though they think it would not be legitimate for the PM to do that.
Democracy eh? I'm happy for the PM to do something I know is illegal as long as it gets me what I want.
-
In the latest installment of the world has gone mad and you just don't know what is actual news or fake news - Oliver Letwin and all the other party leaders (apart from the DUP) have joined Corbyn in signing an official Labour motion to be debated tomorrow to allow parliament to block a No Deal Brexit.
That's confirmed marxist and IRA terrorist Jeremy Corbyn and the man who devised the Poll Tax for Margaret Thatcher and was David Cameron's fixer, putting a joint motion to Parliament.
And if you don't know why that is amazing - google it.
Wilts, I think you'd better quickly change that to IRA terrorist sympathiser Jeremy Corbyn.
-
Well that's put the cat among the pigeons.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48613921
What is Labour's policy now? There won't be another deal cut before October. Certainly not one that would be acceptable to the vast majority of Labour supporters. And this, on the face of it, has just given a big boost to the PM candidates who are prepared to tip us into the catastrophe of No Deal.
-
I haven't yet seen a breakdown of the voting but I would guess that it's irrelevant what Labour's policy is because there are enough Labour MP's in Leave constituencies to decide it. If they wont vote to take No Deal off the table - they certainly wont vote for a 2nd referendum.
A more pertenent question is what will the Tory remainers, Rudd, Gaulke (May?) do if they are faced with a choice or No Deal or voting down the new PM in a vote of confidence? Because that's where we are going...
-
Yeah Wilts, I'll agree on all of that.
Problem then comes that if the Johnson's Govt is brought down in a NC vote in September, say, but Labour is still prevaricating on its Brexit policy, we have a split centre-to-left electorate, while Johnson has spent the summer wooing back BP supporters through telling them how hard he is being with Brussels...
In those conditions, I'd want decent odds to bet against Johnson getting back in with a tidy majority.
-
Fascinating (well, to me, anyway) analysis of data from a big YouGov poll of how people voted at the Referendum, and what their take on Brexit is now.
https://mobile.twitter.com/kevcunningham/status/1138426160671535105
Big picture is that the following groups have moved more in favour of Remain.
Younger voters (younger than 50-60)
Voters with higher educational qualification.
Voters who are in work.
Lab, LD, Green, SNP voters from 2017.
People who didn't vote in 2017 GE.
The following have moved more in favour of Leave.
Older people (60+)
Non-working voters
Voters with lower educational qualifications.
Tory voters from 2017.
And before anyone gets the arse on, those are just the facts from that very big poll.
-
And that data in your last post is why I think your 2nd to last post is wrong Billy.
If Johnson leads the Tories into the next GE without delivering Brexit (and remember he is now promising No deal on 31st October) why would those people vote for him and not Farage? Who will be telling them Johnson is a liar that can't be trusted as he voted for May's deal and refused to follow through a No Deal.
So for my money that will split the leave vote letting in Labour, LD's & SNP and we will be looking to Ed Milliband to form a coalition of chaos. Or something like that.
-
Wilts.
The point is that if Labour can't pu back the Remain vote that they've lost to the LDs and Greens, Johnson doesn't NEED to pull the other groups in. The 60+ group is by far the biggest single group of voters. If he goes all Rule Brittannia and bring back those who have gone to Farage, he can easily get the Tory vote share back up into the mid-30s. As things currently stand, that would be enough for a landslide.
-
Too early to call the outcomes at the moment.
8 Labour MP's voted Tory (including Mann and Flint), 13 others either abstained or did not vote.
Some thinking that they will get another shot to change their position.
They will be toast if they do not support a Labour No Confidence motion.
Some Tories might have been concerned about the threat of withdrawing the whip if they supported Labour.
This would mean that they could not vote in the leadership election.
Keeping their powder dry.
The critical vote is going to be the vote of no confidence, which Labour will table after the new Tory leader shows his hand.
How many will join the 10 Tory refuseniks today?.......How many of the Labour rebels will think on?
-
And once again Albie. What will be the point of a NC vote if Johnson's Tories are 15% ahead in the polls?
-
False predicate IMHO, BST.
There is no evidence that the Tories would be 15% ahead at the time of a GE, Billy.
Your speculations based on the incorrect extrapolation of polling data is not evidence.
You keep reciting this stuff without any error bars.
Failure to show uncertainty is nonsense on stilts.
It is possible to regain such a vote, but not likely by any measure at this stage.
An assumption of a 15% lead is improbable.
It is clear from the Cambridge Analytica episode that the machine learning/AI data driving electoral decisions at the margin, will come into play in the final days before the vote.
The data from polls is part of the feedstock for micro targeting the undecided in the last push.
If you do not support the Labour position for a public vote, then your previous passion for Ref2 looks very odd.
You must agree that a GE is the better option because of the wider policy debate and the need to change HoC numbers?
-
A message from Gary Lineker
Dear SydneyRover
We’ve got some huge news for you.
The Brexit crisis is escalating. Crunch time is approaching. So the People’s Vote campaign is today launching an all-out nationwide offensive with rallies in 15 towns and cities in every corner of the country, starting in Leeds on 22 June and culminating in a massive, historic march in London on October 12.
This campaign - ‘Let Us Be Heard’ – will show the strength, the scale and the sheer bloody-mindedness of our movement. We will not allow a destructive Brexit – deal or No Deal – to be forced on us.
Our success now depends on the efforts of every one of us. So we want to see you there. And we also need your help to pay for this programme of activity – the events, the logistics, the materials and the staff that will make it happen. Will you chip in to help us in this fight?
I'll chip in £3
I'll chip in £7
I'll chip in £15
Barely a year after being created, our campaign has gone from the margins of political debate to one with a real chance of securing the British people the chance to be heard through a final say referendum. We are now entering the most intense and sustained period of campaigning activity we have ever undertaken. We want you to be a part of it.
So, save the dates. And together let’s save the country.
Gary Lineker,
Leading Supporter of the People's Vote campaign
-
Albie.
That last post sounds for all the world like a Twitter thread when the Russian bots have decided to pile in.
I'm not extrapolating anything from the polls. That's a very silly thing to say because if we extrapolate the polls, both Lab and the Tories will be on zero by October.
What I'm doing is making a judgement on how I think the polls will move over the summer. With reasoning behind that judgement.
You can agree or disagree with that reasoning and the conclusions. You can ignore it.
Hey, you could even explain why you think it's wrong.
Whatever you do, I'm sure you can do better than your last post.
By the way. The final sentence in that post. I think that's where we differ in our assessment of the landscape.
You think that the wider policy issues will determine a near-future election.
I think it will be dominated by Brexit and that people who feel that Labour has betrayed them on that score are not guaranteed to vote Labour.
Just as so many people on the Left put conscience before pragmatism in 2010 and in doing so gave us Austerity, so Left Remainers may well do the same and secure PM Johnson for 5 years.
Could YOU blame them?
-
Bots? Scam pure and simple more like.
-
A message from Gary Lineker
Dear SydneyRover
We’ve got some huge news for you.
The Brexit crisis is escalating. Crunch time is approaching. So the People’s Vote campaign is today launching an all-out nationwide offensive with rallies in 15 towns and cities in every corner of the country, starting in Leeds on 22 June and culminating in a massive, historic march in London on October 12.
This campaign - ‘Let Us Be Heard’ – will show the strength, the scale and the sheer bloody-mindedness of our movement. We will not allow a destructive Brexit – deal or No Deal – to be forced on us.
Our success now depends on the efforts of every one of us. So we want to see you there. And we also need your help to pay for this programme of activity – the events, the logistics, the materials and the staff that will make it happen. Will you chip in to help us in this fight?
I'll chip in £3
I'll chip in £7
I'll chip in £15
Barely a year after being created, our campaign has gone from the margins of political debate to one with a real chance of securing the British people the chance to be heard through a final say referendum. We are now entering the most intense and sustained period of campaigning activity we have ever undertaken. We want you to be a part of it.
So, save the dates. And together let’s save the country.
Gary Lineker,
Leading Supporter of the People's Vote campaign
Is this the same Gary Lineker whose obscene salary is one of the reasons why that disgusting organisation, the BBC, is scrapping free TV licences for many pensioners?
What a horrible loudmouthed gobsh*te he is.
-
A message from Gary Lineker
Dear SydneyRover
We’ve got some huge news for you.
The Brexit crisis is escalating. Crunch time is approaching. So the People’s Vote campaign is today launching an all-out nationwide offensive with rallies in 15 towns and cities in every corner of the country, starting in Leeds on 22 June and culminating in a massive, historic march in London on October 12.
This campaign - ‘Let Us Be Heard’ – will show the strength, the scale and the sheer bloody-mindedness of our movement. We will not allow a destructive Brexit – deal or No Deal – to be forced on us.
Our success now depends on the efforts of every one of us. So we want to see you there. And we also need your help to pay for this programme of activity – the events, the logistics, the materials and the staff that will make it happen. Will you chip in to help us in this fight?
I'll chip in £3
I'll chip in £7
I'll chip in £15
Barely a year after being created, our campaign has gone from the margins of political debate to one with a real chance of securing the British people the chance to be heard through a final say referendum. We are now entering the most intense and sustained period of campaigning activity we have ever undertaken. We want you to be a part of it.
So, save the dates. And together let’s save the country.
Gary Lineker,
Leading Supporter of the People's Vote campaign
Is this the same Gary Lineker whose obscene salary is one of the reasons why that disgusting organisation, the BBC, is scrapping free TV licences for many pensioners?
What a horrible loudmouthed gobsh*te he is.
No one's forcing them to pay him that much? They're free to reduce his salary or get rid. He didn't tell them to f*ck pensioners over.
-
A message from Gary Lineker
Dear SydneyRover
We’ve got some huge news for you.
The Brexit crisis is escalating. Crunch time is approaching. So the People’s Vote campaign is today launching an all-out nationwide offensive with rallies in 15 towns and cities in every corner of the country, starting in Leeds on 22 June and culminating in a massive, historic march in London on October 12.
This campaign - ‘Let Us Be Heard’ – will show the strength, the scale and the sheer bloody-mindedness of our movement. We will not allow a destructive Brexit – deal or No Deal – to be forced on us.
Our success now depends on the efforts of every one of us. So we want to see you there. And we also need your help to pay for this programme of activity – the events, the logistics, the materials and the staff that will make it happen. Will you chip in to help us in this fight?
I'll chip in £3
I'll chip in £7
I'll chip in £15
Barely a year after being created, our campaign has gone from the margins of political debate to one with a real chance of securing the British people the chance to be heard through a final say referendum. We are now entering the most intense and sustained period of campaigning activity we have ever undertaken. We want you to be a part of it.
So, save the dates. And together let’s save the country.
Gary Lineker,
Leading Supporter of the People's Vote campaign
Is this the same Gary Lineker whose obscene salary is one of the reasons why that disgusting organisation, the BBC, is scrapping free TV licences for many pensioners?
What a horrible loudmouthed gobsh*te he is.
No one's forcing them to pay him that much? They're free to reduce his salary or get rid. He didn't tell them to f*ck pensioners over.
That's not what I'm talking about. I've made my feelings known on here before about overpaid celebrities thinking they're representative of ordinary people; they're not, they live in a different world to us.
As for the BBC, we all know their views on Brexit.
-
BST,
OK...one more time.
"Hey, you could even explain why you think it's wrong".
It has been explained to you many times....you just cannot see it.
The extrapolation is based on your own assumptions about trend, without qualification.
It has been pointed out to you before that you cannot refer back to polling data from the year dot, from various sources, and draw any conclusion about future intentions for an unknown date.
As an analytical process it is totally invalid.
Since 2010 the variation in polling error has been growing year on year. This is alongside the rise of social media as a campaign tool.
The success of Cambridge Analytica was in micro targeting messages to voters in the short window prior to the vote.
In doing this, polls from the previous week were turned around in the polling station.
Watch the Dominic Cummins vid again;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDbRxH9Kiy4
You can FF to 15;45 to get the explanation on polls and machine learning.
It shows the political world you advocate is lost forever.
I am not saying that this is a good thing...it is just a reality to which we must adapt.
Once the Brexit issue is concluded, votes realign back into the earlier mould.
Your own assessment of a Tory rebound is based on this.
It is an open question as to the extent of that rebound. I also think Labour will get a rebound, in response to the new Tory leader.
Lets leave it there, and agree to disagree, before you start referring to polling information from before the Siege of Mafeking.
-
SS
You mean the BBC whose chief political interviewer is a Brexit supporter who has regularly been involved in trolling and encouraging abuse of the reporter who has worked extensively to find the source of Farage's funding?
The BBC who have had Farage on QT 34 times? Which is 34 times more than all other MEPs put together.
The BBC who regularly have interviews with people from the rabidly Brexit supporting IEA? That's the IEA who won't tell anyone who funds it to the tune of several million quid per year.
The BBC who just this afternoon interviewed Peter Lilley, who was pouring out gibberish claptrap about No Deal Brexit and saying that everyone who said it was a problem were conspiracy theorists?
That BBC?
-
Albie.
For a very intelligent person, you are totally and utterly misreading what I thought I was saying very clearly.
1) I'm NOT saying that the Tory vote will revert back after Brexit. I'm saying it will revert back BECAUSE of Brexit, when Johnson tacks to Hard Brexit and Farage calls off the attack.
I'm not extrapolating anything from polls. I'm saying what I think the political landscape will be this summer.
You are assuming that Labour's vote will rebound because people will see that it's Corbyn or Johnson. I don't agree with that logic. And I've pointed out that many hundreds of thousands of people on the Left did NOT go back to Labour in 2010, when the alternative was Austerity. You may well have been one of them, I don't know. But given that fact, I fail to see why you think Left Remainers will be more pragmatic that the Hard Left were in 2010.
I do know all about Cummings and CA. I've written about it extensively here. And yes, that does make the political prediction situation harder. But polls are not out by more than a few%, even so.
I've no idea what you're talking about in suggesting that I quote ancient polls. That sounds like you've lost the plot to be honest.
-
You forget the most interesting one Billy.
Sarah Sands, ex-Daily Mail & Daily Telegraph columnist, now editor of the Radio4 Today Programme (which means she decides the guests and topics that programme covers) celebrated the Brexit result with Farage, Rupert Murdoch and Liam Fox.
https://twitter.com/dylanstrain/status/976748201976975360?lang=en
-
Wilts.
My typing finger got cramp.
-
Billy
I still disagree with your analysis of how popular Johnson will be in the country - and if that will lead to an election victory. Yougov have him at 31% positive and 47% negative.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Boris_Johnson
PoliticsHome say he is alienating for the floating voters needed to win an election
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/104363/boris-johnson-failing-appeal
We could however find out as early as next month which hypothesis is right. The result of the recall petiton for Chris Davis will be announced next Thursday. IF he is recalled there will be a byelection in Brecon, which will be a Tory/LD fight. Can Boris hold an 8000 majority - or will Welsh farmers frightened of No Deal overturn this? It may not happen, but that would be a proper test.
-
Wilts.
As I keep repeating, if Labour can't reunite the vote on the Left, Johnson doesn't need floating voters to win a majority.
Con 35
Lab 25
LD 20
Green 10
Equals landslide.
By the way, I know you don't believe in polls (although oddly you DO keep quoting them) but on the same site, Corbyn's figures are 26% positive, 54% negative, and Theresa May's (the worst PM in 100 years) are 27% and 49%.
Quite an achievement for Corbyn to be behind those two and be unassailable. Still, I'm sure those of you who took over the party all know what you are doing.
-
BST,
There is no significant variation between a Tory rebound after Brexit, or because of it.
It is a distinction without a difference.
You have posted many times offering conclusions based on polling in earlier elections.
You seem to think austerity came forward in 2010. That is not so.
Austerity was underway before 2010, and it was enabled through mechanisms like PFI in public procurement.
The drive was to acquire facilities off balance sheet.
It may not suit your agenda, but you need to face up to the legacy of New Labour.
The existing direction of travel created the conditions under which Cameron/Osbourne and the coalition could follow through with their own Tory austerity package.
You say you recognise the Cambridge Analytica input, then say;
"But polls are not out by more than a few%, even so"........completely missing the point that it is the small % at the margin which is the critical battleground.
You can lead a horse to water, so they say!
-
Thing is though Billy, I don't trust polls because there are so many variables they don't capture. Like that one you have quoted - the interpretation of which some pollsters have called 'bonkers'.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-poll-tory-leadership-race-election-corbyn-conservatives-a8954861.html
I could of course point you to the two other polls that came out this week, both of which show Labour with a small lead, but that of course doesn't suit your narrative.
-
Albie.
I'm really not sure to start with that scattergun rant, but I'll have to choose somewhere.
What about the most illuminating aspect. You've gone into detail several times about your hatred of Brown's economics. Since you didn't answer my direct question, I'll assume therefore that you didn't vote Labour in 2010 on a matter of principle. Two things then immediately jump out. The first is utterly irrelevant to the discussion we are having, but since you raise it, I'll address it. Conflating Brown's economics with Osborne's that followed is a pathetically childish stance that doesn't warrant a response. What DOES warrant a response is the consequence of that opinion.
The several hundred thousand left wingers who, through that idiotic logic that you've shown, chose not to vote Labour in 2010 are the DIRECT reason why we've had a decade of stagnated NHS funding, real terms massive cuts in school funding, decimation of local council and social care funding and zero real wage growth.
That logic is, if I can't have a Labour party just as I want it, I might as well have the Tories.
But let's get onto what we were actually discussing. You, presumably, approve of left wingers who didn't vote for Brown. Because they were acting through conscience. Doesn't that apply to Left Remainers who are deserting Labour in millions? My experience (and its wide and deep) of dealing with the Far Left is that their opinion is "WE don't vote for YOUR Labour because we're principled. But YOU don't vote for OUR Labour because you're a centrist, Blairite, Red Tory, neolib class traitor."
On the issue of voter rebound, I truly haven't got a clue what you are on about now. You started off saying that I was saying it would happen after Brexit. I responded saying I neither said nor thought anything of the sort. You responded by saying it's irrelevant.
On CA and polling accuracy, I'm clearly not making myself clear so I'll explain a bit more carefully. I AGREE that CA's methods throw a hand grenade into the system. I AGREE that polls are not infallible. But none of that explains away the fact that Labour has lost something between 35-50% of its support since Xmas. And, my central point, if Johnson's Tories make up the ground that they have lost, Labour will have to do the same or risk being wiped out. My point all along is that there are obvious means by which BOTH parties can recover much of their lost support. The Tories will undoubtedly take that opportunity over the summer. Corbyn's inner circle seems determined not to take Labour's obvious route.
-
A message from Gary Lineker
Dear SydneyRover
We’ve got some huge news for you.
The Brexit crisis is escalating. Crunch time is approaching. So the People’s Vote campaign is today launching an all-out nationwide offensive with rallies in 15 towns and cities in every corner of the country, starting in Leeds on 22 June and culminating in a massive, historic march in London on October 12.
This campaign - ‘Let Us Be Heard’ – will show the strength, the scale and the sheer bloody-mindedness of our movement. We will not allow a destructive Brexit – deal or No Deal – to be forced on us.
Our success now depends on the efforts of every one of us. So we want to see you there. And we also need your help to pay for this programme of activity – the events, the logistics, the materials and the staff that will make it happen. Will you chip in to help us in this fight?
I'll chip in £3
I'll chip in £7
I'll chip in £15
Barely a year after being created, our campaign has gone from the margins of political debate to one with a real chance of securing the British people the chance to be heard through a final say referendum. We are now entering the most intense and sustained period of campaigning activity we have ever undertaken. We want you to be a part of it.
So, save the dates. And together let’s save the country.
Gary Lineker,
Leading Supporter of the People's Vote campaign
Is this the same Gary Lineker whose obscene salary is one of the reasons why that disgusting organisation, the BBC, is scrapping free TV licences for many pensioners?
What a horrible loudmouthed gobsh*te he is.
Yes Steve, that disgusting party that put the mechanism in place to phase out free licences. Tht's how the tory ideology works, give tax cuts to the top end of town wait until there is no money left in the pot then you can say the country can no longer afford free tv licences for pensioners or a NHS or ........., instead why not means test it so the those that can afford to pay do so?.
''The policy of free TV licences for the over-75s was introduced in 1999 by the then Labour chancellor, Gordon Brown, with the cost met by the government, which paid the BBC to provide the service.
However, in 2015 the Conservative government, guided by George Osborne, struck a deal under which the subsidy would be phased out by 2020, with the broadcaster having to shoulder the cost of free TV licences.
The government later gave the BBC responsibility for deciding what to do about the benefit, meaning any unpopular decisions on charging over-75s had to be made by the BBC rather than ministers.
A consultation was launched at the end of 2018, with the BBC arguing that many over-75s were increasingly wealthy and it could not afford the cost of providing them with a service for free.
The corporation argued that the £745m annual cost of maintaining the status quo would have taken up a fifth of its budget, equal to the total amount it spends on all of BBC Two, BBC Three, BBC Four, the BBC News channel, CBBC and CBeebies. The BBC estimates that the new proposal will cost it £250m a year, requiring some cuts but no channel closures''
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jun/10/bbc-confirms-plans-to-make-over-75s-pay-licence-fee
-
Wilts.
I know you don't trust polls. You keep telling me that. Usually followed by a quote of figures from a poll.
But I don't understand what poll I'm supposed to have quoted, mind. I haven't quoted ANY poll about Johnson. Certainly not THAT stupid one. I've given my opinion on how I think politics and party support will play out over the summer. Sorry not to have said what you want me to have said.
Finally, it's great that a couple of polls have shown Lab picking up. I have noticed those. If the next few fall in line that will be good. We can all join hands and dance a jig at, after 9 years of Tory rule and with the Tories in chaos, Labour is at the giddy heights of having slightly worse support than in 1983 and 2010. And yes, these polls give us a small lead over the Tories. But NOW is not the point. The time to judge will be when Johnson does the obvious things he needs to do to pull in 3-4m erstwhile Tory voters who've gone over to Farage. My worry is that Labour on 26% in the polls won't look like much to celebrate then. So Labour needs to have a strategy for getting back into the mid-high 30s pretty damn quickly. And the obvious way to do that is being blocked by Corbyn and the 4Ms.
Now, maybe I'm being too pessimistic. Maybe Left Remainers who have currently deserted Labour WILL drift back in their millions, despite Corbyn's almost obsessive zeal to drive them away over Brexit. I deeply hope that they do. But a strategy that assumes that will happen, from a Left that turned its nose to Brown in 2010 because he didn't represent the Labour party that they wanted is...well, "risky" to put it mildly. You might even say "hypocritical".
-
Well, I see where Albie's getting his steer from.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/1139611599789051904
We're just about to get Johnson as PM. We're 9 years into Tory Austerity. Our foreign policy is in chaos. The current PM is the worst in a century.
And Comrade Lansmann's Momentum army decides to turn it's fire on...New Labour as the source of all evil.
This is what happens when you get in a bunker and everyone who is not in there with you is the enemy. We've seen attacks on people as far to the Left as Thornberry, McDonnell and Paul Mason over the past few weeks, for having the temerity to question the doctrine of Corbynite Infallibility.
It's heartbreaking. A tiny group of ideological maniancs are systematically destroying Labour's electability and swinging punches at anyone who questions them. PRECISELY at a time when they need to be building a broad Left alliance.
-
Interesting bit of polling here that shows the country is becoming more polarised and hardline than ever. 78% of people are purists, prepared to accept on Remain or No Deal, with only 22% prepared to compromise over a deal.
https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/06/14/a-country-of-purists-the-polling-which-lays-bare-the-death
As rightly pointed out by Billy I think it is always valid to question how poll results will actually transfer into real world votes. In this case how do these figures account for the Perterborough By-Election? Where over 50% of the electorate voted for a 'compromise' party.
-
Wilts.
Fundamental error of logic there buddy.
50% of those who voted not of the electorate.
14% of the electorate voted Labour. 10% voted Tory.
And then there's a contextual error. In assuming that anyone who voted for what you call a compromise party did so for the sole reason that they were a compromise party. Had I been a Peterborough elector, I would have voted Labour while passionately disagreeing with Corbyn's EU policy. Because not to have voted Labour would have risked a Farageist getting in.
-
Billy
And your conclusion from a poll that says only 22% of electors will vote for a compromise when in reality 50% of people did is...
PS - interesting story on the home page of The Independent website don't you think?
-
Wilts.
I've got lots of conclusions. The biggest one is that the Labour vote from 2017-now in Peterborough fell by 18%. Which is pretty much exactly what the average of the polls is saying Labour's current national support is below it's 2017 support.
Tell me something. Are you actually relaxed about Labour's current position? Only I'm f**king incandescent about it.
-
The vacuous supporting the unedifying?
''Boris Johnson is supporting my agenda – which is why I'm supporting him''
esther mcvey food banks-r-us.
''The Conservative Party needs to become a natural home for voters in hard-working communities who have been abandoned by Jeremy Corbyn’s divisive Labour Party.
If we are to win again we have got to deliver for our people in the North, the Midlands and the regions, and we need a leader who can reach out to them''
''So prey tell mcvey, what have you delivered for the north since the second world war?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/15/boris-johnson-supporting-agenda-supporting/
-
What posseses a working class man to vote anything other than labour?
I understand that in the grand scheme of things and after all that had been said in this thread, it's quite a question to ask.
But in reality, what posseses the working man here? Are they traitors to their people?
-
''Dominic Raab: Tories are toast if they miss Brexit October deadline''
'The Conservatives cannot win an election unless we’ve delivered Brexit,” he added, speaking to Sophy Ridge on Sky News.
Raab also again declined to rule out proroguing parliament, if as prime minister he believed a no-deal Brexit was the right course and MPs sought to block it.
“I don’t think it’s something we would want to do,” he said, “and I think it’s very unlikely. But what’s really scandalous about this, is where people have been trying to sabotage the will of the people, and break their promises left, right and centre.”
Just remember he's talking about his own party here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! as it's the tories that are holding up brexit.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/16/dominic-raab-tories-are-toast-if-they-miss-brexit-october-deadline
-
''Theresa May could yet give us the ultimate parting gift: a Brexit referendum''
"The obscene sight of Tory leadership candidates splashing out cash by the bucketload is just one of the head-clutching, this-can’t-be-happening unbelievables of this extraordinary time. Spaffing it up the wall doesn’t begin to express the revolting spectacle of wild tax cuts and eye-catching gimmicks from the same austerians who garrotted every public service. Theresa May is the biggest spender, spraying goodbye billions on mental health, schools, colleges and a zero-carbon pledge, while Philip Hammond’s Treasury declares it “immoral” to steal from the emergency no-deal fund. What does she care? She is taking her revenge on them all''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/17/theresa-may-brexit-referendum
-
“I don’t think it’s something we would want to do,” he said, “and I think it’s very unlikely. But what’s really scandalous about this, is where people have been trying to sabotage the will of the people, and break their promises left, right and centre.”
Just remember he's talking about his own party here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! as it's the tories that are holding up brexit.
As I have said many many times on here (broken record) - they say it would be undemocratic NOT to deliver on the Referendum result YET it was them (largely) who ignored the huge 33% majority* in the 1976 Referendum and brought us to this point - and that was seemingly ok
They have go so close to their goal and they aint gonna give up now
* After a trial Membership it was around 66 remain in / or to join permanently and 34 to chck it there and then
-
What posseses a working class man to vote anything other than labour?
I understand that in the grand scheme of things and after all that had been said in this thread, it's quite a question to ask.
But in reality, what posseses the working man here? Are they traitors to their people?
The current leadership!
-
What posseses a working class man to vote anything other than labour?
I understand that in the grand scheme of things and after all that had been said in this thread, it's quite a question to ask.
But in reality, what posseses the working man here? Are they traitors to their people?
The current leadership!
Well Sproty this is what the really smart people of the world are thinking about the government
''Britain is being led to a no-deal Brexit by a political elite “which has great difficulties discerning and telling the truth”, the UK’s former ambassador to the EU has said, in a withering assessment of the Conservative candidates vying to be prime minister.
Ivan Rogers, who resigned from his post in 2017 after clashing with Theresa May’s senior advisers, suggested it was “probable” the UK would leave the EU without a deal in what he described as an act of “economic lunacy”.
He said the Tory leadership election brought to mind the quote of the French statesman Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord about the Bourbons in that they had “learned nothing and forgotten nothing”.
“We hear all manner of undeliverable promises, made as if the events of the last three years have made no impact on the collective consciousness,” Rogers said of the remaining leadership candidates''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/18/uk-led-towards-no-deal-brexit-by-untruthful-elite-says-ex-eu-envoy-ivan-rogers
-
This is simply astonishing.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye
59% of Tory members would be prepared to see civil war in Northern Ireland.
60% would be prepared to see significant damage to our economy, with the attendant huge reductions in our living standards.
63% would be prepared to see the break up of the UK.
Just so long as we get Brexit...
This isn't logical thinking. This is an obsessive death cult.
It's become like Gollum and the ring.
And here's the really bizarre thing. Back in the early 2010's, only a slack handful of people said in opinion polls that the EU and our relationship with it was the most important thing in politics. Now, it's become the thing that defines us. and the people who will choose your new PM this summer are overwhelmingly prepared to see us brought to our knees, just so long as we get Brexit.
-
Well now. This looks like fun.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/18/brexit-party-check-donations-for-illegal-funding-nigel-farage
Farage has been told that his party needs to check the source of all the donations it received in the run up to the EU elections. And to return it or give the money to the Treasury if it cannot demonstrate that the donations came from bona fide UK citizens.
Which will be a tad difficult for him to do, because their funding page was deliberately and consciously set up so that they DIDN'T check who the money was coming from.
-
“They need to go back and look at the payments they have received, over or under £500, and they need to satisfy themselves that they are sure those amounts of money are permissible. And if they are not, they need to forfeit those amounts of money."
“It’s for the party to satisfy themselves of that"
WTF!!! What is this 'digital, culture, media and sport committee'. What about doing all of that for them and then taking some action against them when you get proof of what they've done?!!!
-
Pies.
The Electoral Commission has said that they want to be sat at the side of them when the BP do those checks.
The EC has to be seen to be whiter than white in the current febrile atmosphere.
But the noose is closing on the crooked bas**rds.
-
This is simply astonishing.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye
59% of Tory members would be prepared to see civil war in Northern Ireland.
60% would be prepared to see significant damage to our economy, with the attendant huge reductions in our living standards.
63% would be prepared to see the break up of the UK.
Just so long as we get Brexit...
This isn't logical thinking. This is an obsessive death cult.
It's become like Gollum and the ring.
And here's the really bizarre thing. Back in the early 2010's, only a slack handful of people said in opinion polls that the EU and our relationship with it was the most important thing in politics. Now, it's become the thing that defines us. and the people who will choose your new PM this summer are overwhelmingly prepared to see us brought to our knees, just so long as we get Brexit.
[/quote
This is unbelievable, if I can't have it I going to smash it into little pieces-so there.
-
The times are a-changing but not fast enough.
''MPs take Met to court over leave campaign investigation delays''
''A group including three MPs has begun a legal bid to challenge police over delays to the investigation into alleged offences by leave campaigners in the Brexit referendum.
The application for judicial review says that it is nearly a year since the Metropolitan police were given evidence connected to the Vote Leave and Leave.EU campaigns and the delays were “exceptional, unjustified and in breach of the proposed defendants’ respective duties”.
''The National Crime Agency is also looking into allegations of multiple criminal offences by Banks and Bilney, it announced in November.
In October the Conservative MP Damian Collins asked the Met why it had not opened a formal investigation into the allegations, following reports the force had delayed the process due to “political sensitivities”.
Lets hope they get their day in court well before October.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/19/mps-take-met-to-court-over-leave-campaign-investigation-delays
-
Is that why there are vote fiddling allegations in Peterborough, a sort of 'justified' means of stopping the Brexit party from winning? ....Or are we saying nowt about that until it's proved! Guilty until innocent like, you know like the way proper grown-ups act?
-
BB.
The financial irregularities in the 2016 campaign are a lot more than just "allegations". The EC has already fined both Vote Leave and Leave.EU. Darren grimes of Vote leave has already been convicted. The question remaining is what on earth the Met police are going to do with the rest of the mountain of evidence that they have. It's not encouraging that they are saying "political sensitivities" are a reason that they haven't come to a conclusion yet. Like people with prominent political positions should be treated differently?
The point here is that if there is evidence of serious, criminal action which during an election campaign as crucial as this one, the Met should be running at 100mph to arrive at a conclusion. Whichever way. The outcome of that process is fundamentally important to the way in which we should judge the 2016 vote. If it IS the case that even more serious crimes were committed by the Leave side than we already know of, there is no case whatsoever for anyone claiming that the result of that vote is sacrosanct.
-
Come off it BST. You're kidding nobody. If the alleged Peterborough voting scandal had been brought on the Brexit party you'd have started a new thread about it before you'd finished your orgasm.
-
BB.
If you start from the position that the person you are talking to is a mendacious hypoctrite, you'll convince yourself that there is mendacious hypocrisy in everything they say. And you'll ignore what they actually say, preferring to convince yourself that what they really believe is what you want them to believe. Good luck with that outlook.
-
BST. That looks to me like your perception of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson and any other leading Brexiter.
-
BB
So you ignore the facts I present to support my assessment?
-
My point is it's you who is selective in choosing to ignore stories that don't support your agenda.
-
Am I?
Ok. Now I understand why you ignore evidence and just chuck childish insults around. Makes sense to do that I suppose if you work on the assumption that everyone else ignores what they don't like.
For the record, my take is that if there is evidence that ANYONE has committed criminal offences in an election, they should be investigated and prosecuted. And consideration should be given to re-running the vote if it is sufficiently serious evidence.
-
I reckon there always rules broken, lies told before and promises not kept after every election, and if we had a revote every time it happened we'd never get a vote carried.
Crimes like burning votes are another, much more serious matter, though.
-
How do you burn votes?
-
BB
No one's talking about promises broken on this topic. It's about laws of the land being broken. Criminal activity.
There are black and white laws about not using foreign money in election campaigns. Because foreigners are not likely to have the interests of Britain first and foremost if they pour money into election campaigns. So it is outlawed. Illegal. Criminal to facilitate that.
THAT is the accusation that Leave.EU are facing.
If there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that ballot papers which should have been counted, have been burned in Peterborough, then someone should go down for a very long time and the vote should be re-run. I say that because I think it's vitally important that we have faith and confidence in electoral processes, and that they are not open to abuse by criminals.
-
Let's be honest for once BST, your eagerness to learn about Brexit criminality probably matches that of the group of Remainers who represent The Electoral Commission in their determination to find it.
Stop Brexit by any means, eh!
-
BB.
If you start from the position that the person you are talking to is a mendacious hypoctrite, you'll convince yourself that there is mendacious hypocrisy in everything they say. And you'll ignore what they actually say, preferring to convince yourself that what they really believe is what you want them to believe. Good luck with that outlook.
There is one aspect that is being overlooked in the Peterborough investigation BST is that no one has yet said that the allegations advantaged any particular candidate so unless any evidence is circulating on social media we don't know. But what we do know is Farage is jumping up and down in the pram shouting we wuz robbed and his trump-like followers are falling in behind.
-
Sydney.
That's fine. There's an investigation going on by the police. They are moving fast. They've already announced that there's no evidence to support 3 of the allegations. If there's evidence for the others, it'll come out.
-
Aye, let the law sort it lads! Innocent until proved guilty and all that! Meanwhile, it's unfair for us media folk to make any further comments! After all, we are not judge and jury! Let's be grown up about it! Damn those despicable people who exploit such headlines in order to gain political smarty points!
-
BB
If you are aware of any detail of the evidence supporting these allegations, tell us. Then we can discuss it.
As Sydney says, the stuff I've seen doesn't even say who the allegations are against, or who made them. So it's a bit hard to discuss them in any detail.
-
Well, Sydney doesn't read his own bible properly then. The Guardian link he posted on the 'Posh rotten borough' thread mentions it's the Asian community under scrutiny with the obvious racist response from the Labour party.
-
Cheers BB. Do we know what they are alleged to have done, who alleged it, what the evidence is etc?
-
Why don't you pretend it's the Brexit side being investigated and read it yourself?
-
Thanks for the pointer BB.
Very useful. So it's allegations on social media. If they have genuine evidence, I'll look forward to the prosecutions. Genuinely.
Sounds like Farage has evidence because he's quoted as saying "We’ve seen so many cases now where again and again we find – particularly in the inner cities – postal voting is producing the wrong results." He must have some pretty solid evidence to make a claim like that, and I'm sure he'll be passing it onto the police for their investigation.
-
At least there's prospects of promising new trade deals after Brexit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRhlRM6rYck
The pregnant pause just before the applause says it all. Though I still can't work out why they actually applauded.
-
I’m surprised by this. Nick Clegg has announced that there is “absolutely no evidence” that Russia influenced the Brexit vote using Facebook.
Considering the claims and counter claims of Russian meddling in the vote in certain sections of the media AND who it is making the statement, this is pretty remarkable.
I wonder if anyone who’d made the claims that FB was used by Russia to influence the vote will now stand corrected?
Of course, that’s not to say they didn’t use any other means bar FB
-
I’m surprised by this. Nick Clegg has announced that there is “absolutely no evidence” that Russia influenced the Brexit vote using Facebook.
Considering the claims and counter claims of Russian meddling in the vote in certain sections of the media AND who it is making the statement, this is pretty remarkable.
I wonder if anyone who’d made the claims that FB was used by Russia to influence the vote will now stand corrected?
Of course, that’s not to say they didn’t use any other means bar FB
I think there maybe quite a bit more to say about this HA, but at the moment we have to take it at face value.
''There are ongoing investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum[1] being undertaken by the UK Electoral Commission, the UK Parliament's Culture Select Committee, and the United States Senate, on alleged Russian interference in the "Brexit" referendum of 23 June 2016.[2] This has raised questions over the legal validity of the referendum.[3]
Contents''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum
-
Meanwhile yet another damning report about the dangers and risks of Brexit, and of course nothing positive ever comes out.
''UK finances forecast to suffer under most forms of Brexit
Cost of leaving EU will also impede new policy initiatives, thinktank’s report says''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/24/uk-finances-forecast-suffer-under-most-forms-brexit
-
I’m surprised by this. Nick Clegg has announced that there is “absolutely no evidence” that Russia influenced the Brexit vote using Facebook.
Considering the claims and counter claims of Russian meddling in the vote in certain sections of the media AND who it is making the statement, this is pretty remarkable.
I wonder if anyone who’d made the claims that FB was used by Russia to influence the vote will now stand corrected?
Of course, that’s not to say they didn’t use any other means bar FB
Thanks for that Herbert. I never thought I'd ever welcome anything said by Nick Clegg.
I know one or two on here who'll feel a bit embarrassed by that.
-
Facebook employee says Facebook didn't do anything wrong. Hmm.
Even then, the inquiry he mentions only looked at Russian bots, fake accounts, and fake pages. It mentions nothing about the very real people that funnelled foreign money through organisations like Leave.Eu and individuals like Arron Banks. I wonder why Facebook, who are on a PR offensive anyway, would commission a flawed internal investigation that's presented by a serial bullshit artist like Clegg in a way that omits several key facts and makes it seem like they did nothing wrong?
-
I’m surprised by this. Nick Clegg has announced that there is “absolutely no evidence” that Russia influenced the Brexit vote using Facebook.
Considering the claims and counter claims of Russian meddling in the vote in certain sections of the media AND who it is making the statement, this is pretty remarkable.
I wonder if anyone who’d made the claims that FB was used by Russia to influence the vote will now stand corrected?
Of course, that’s not to say they didn’t use any other means bar FB
Thanks for that Herbert. I never thought I'd ever welcome anything said by Nick Clegg.
I know one or two on here who'll feel a bit embarrassed by that.
Not sure who the one or two that you're referring to are SS. Care to point out where anyone on here has said anything that Clegg has contradicted?
-
Looks like Farage thinks Boris is a wibble wobble, doesn't know what he stands for.
''Boris Johnson does speak to Steve Bannon, says Nigel Farage
Brexit party leader’s comments increase pressure on No 10 frontrunner to address claims''
''At the same event on Monday, Farage said he would back Johnson as prime minister, but only if he pushed for a no-deal Brexit on 31 October, saying he did not trust him to do this''
“He’ll have my support if he does the right thing. But I don’t know what he’s going to do,” Farage said. “I’d love to know who the real Boris Johnson is, I’d love to know what he really, really, truly believes. Our attitude, as the Brexit party, is why would we trust anybody?”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/24/nigel-farage-deal-tories-ensure-no-deal-brexit-boris-johnson
-
Someone pointed out on Twitter the parallel between Brexit and the handling of Friday morning's little spot of Domestic Violence. Have a blazing row in your own house - then blame the neighbours.
-
Looks like Farage thinks Boris is a wibble wobble, doesn't know what he stands for.
''Boris Johnson does speak to Steve Bannon, says Nigel Farage
Brexit party leader’s comments increase pressure on No 10 frontrunner to address claims''
''At the same event on Monday, Farage said he would back Johnson as prime minister, but only if he pushed for a no-deal Brexit on 31 October, saying he did not trust him to do this''
“He’ll have my support if he does the right thing. But I don’t know what he’s going to do,” Farage said. “I’d love to know who the real Boris Johnson is, I’d love to know what he really, really, truly believes. Our attitude, as the Brexit party, is why would we trust anybody?”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/24/nigel-farage-deal-tories-ensure-no-deal-brexit-boris-johnson
I thought i'd just pop in and see what was going on .......
It must have been about four years ago since I predicted "one day " Boris and Farage would finally discover their true vocations in life meaning be captains of some news related quiz show etc . I'll come back to this post in ten years.
-
So once again Corbyn has blocked Labour taking a stance on Ref2. Apparently McDonnell said at the Shadow Cabinet meeting today that Labour's approach on this was a slow motion car crash. So that'll be HIM on the Momentum hate list and called a Blairite Neo-Liberal.
Word is apparently that Corbyn's said he needs time to bring "The Movement" with him to a Ref2 position. Which is, frankly, astonishing, given that the overwhelming majority of The Movement want Ref2 to be Labour policy. Maybe by "The Movement" he just means the 4Ms?
-
Fascinating.
https://mobile.twitter.com/davies_will/status/1143860276430823425
If we had Ref2 and a transferrable vote, there's a decent chance that the result WOULD be a sensible, least damaging Brecit. Option three here, which has by far the highest number of first and second preferences.
Would that satisfy you Brexit supporters? I'd accept that as the option that resulted in least overall damage to the economy and social cohesion.
One thing is clear. No Deal wouldn't stand a chance. It is NOT what the public want. Clearly. So if that is rammed through, THAT would be a democratic outrage.
-
Boris dips into the brexit magic pudding again!
"chances of no-deal Brexit are 'a million-to-one against''
Tory leadership frontrunner’s claim comes one day after he said UK will leave EU ‘come what may, do or die’
Boris: "has said the chances of a no-deal Brexit are a “million-to-one against”, despite promising to leave on 31 October whether or not he has managed to strike a new agreement with the European Union"
Without any plan he is promising to take the UK out but also states that a no-deal is a million to 1. We know that the EU and the US have the Irish border in the non-negotiable safe so if we do leave we will still be in a customs union.
It's likely if we leave without a deal my betting is the neither the EU nor the US will trade with us until a backstop is sorted.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/26/boris-johnson-chances-of-no-deal-brexit-are-a-million-to-one-against
-
Raab, another nutjob trying to indemnify his own party and blame the EU (28 countries including us) for the conservative party's future failings!!
Raab ''who is backing the frontrunner after being knocked out of the leadership contest, said any motion from MPs against a no-deal Brexit would have “zero legal effect” and could be overridden.
''He also said it would be “the EU’s fault” if Britain leaves on World Trade Organization terms because it was possible to strike a better Brexit deal before the end of October if there was sufficient political will''
Little Britain eat your heart out.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/26/boris-johnson-could-ignore-efforts-to-block-no-deal-says-raab
-
And on the flip side a bit of common sense.
''No matter who gets into No 10, their Brexit plans are fantasy''
''Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt claim the backstop problems can be fixed by 31 October. They are in for a rude awakening''
''This does not appear to be a question 84% of Conservative party members are remotely bothered with, as they would prefer the fantasy of an immediate “clean Brexit”. They welcome their witching hour of 11pm on 31 October becoming Independence Day, as if it’s some sort of Hollywood blockbuster, with no deal''
''Johnson is not one to worry about details, given the fact that in January Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy negotiator, said: “We’ve looked at every border on this Earth, every border the EU has with a third country – there’s simply no way you can do away with checks and controls.”''
''Then there is the clause in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Section 10, on the subject of the Irish border, states that nothing in this act “authorises regulations which … diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast agreement”. This is likely to mean that the Northern Ireland backstop will stay in place until MPs reach an agreement that honours the UK’s obligations under the Good Friday agreement''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/27/brexit-fantasy-boris-johnson-jeremy-hunt
-
Wing Commander, you have to be concerned for your business in the face of brexit surely?
''Tory leadership: No-deal Brexit could shut down car plants in UK, Japan tells Johnson and Hunt - live news''
''There are over 1,000 Japanese companies operating in the United Kingdom, so we are very concerned with this no-deal Brexit. That would have a very negative impact on their operations ...
There are a few Japanese auto manufacturers operating in the United Kingdom, and some parts are coming from continental Europe. Right now they have a very smooth operation; their stock for each part is only for a few hours.
But if there is a no-deal Brexit, and if they have to go through actual customs inspections physically, those operations may not be able to continue. And many companies are worried about the implications, because they do not know what is going to happen. They don’t know what happens legally or physically. So some companies have already started moving their operations to other places in Europe.
We do not want to disrupt the economic relationship with the UK. So we’ve been asking the UK government: let the Japanese companies know what they can expect and things should happen smoothly without any disruption.
Whenever we have had meetings [with the UK government] that was the issue - please no no-deal Brexit''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/jun/27/tory-leadership-latest-news-boris-johnson-hunt-no-deal-brexit-could-shut-down-car-plants-in-uk-japan-tells-johnson-and-hunt-live-news
-
Fascinating.
https://mobile.twitter.com/davies_will/status/1143860276430823425
If we had Ref2 and a transferrable vote, there's a decent chance that the result WOULD be a sensible, least damaging Brecit. Option three here, which has by far the highest number of first and second preferences.
Would that satisfy you Brexit supporters? I'd accept that as the option that resulted in least overall damage to the economy and social cohesion.
One thing is clear. No Deal wouldn't stand a chance. It is NOT what the public want. Clearly. So if that is rammed through, THAT would be a democratic outrage.
No interest in this then?
I'll give you my take.
The Leave vote was a knife edge decision.
That meant that if you REALLY wanted to take the majority of the country with you, you needed to go for the softest of Brexits. Which is option 3 on that poll. That's only the FIRST best for a minority of people, but a clear majority are prepared to take that as second best.
The May, Johnson and Farage won't accept that for party political reasons, because they want us out of the CU and SM. Despite having no majority wanting that. And despite Johnson and Farage specifically campaigning in 2016 for the sort of compromise type Brexit that they now say is a betrayal of The Will of The People.
Corbyn won't accept that because he wants us out of the SM for ideological reasons.
So we've had a total lack of vision on BOTH sides about what would actually be a sensible compromise that could take the country with them.
Instead, because the Right have been insisting on a Hard Brexit that is the first preference of a small minority, and doesn't even have majority support when you add in second preferences, there, we've headed into this polarised situation. Because the Brexit vote has been hijacked by the Right and interpreted as meaning a Hard Brexit, first choice opinion on the other side is to kill Brexit altogether.
And so, because there's no leadership for the soft compromise option, and because there is no possibility whatsoever of Johnson being able to re-negotiated the Withdrawal Agreement before October, we're now looking at the options being No Deal or No Brexit.
Didn't have to be like that, but that's where we are now. Instead of a compromise that everyone could have grumbled about but accepted, we're left with options that will seriously f**k off nearly half the population. All through pygmy leadership from some politicians (May, Corbyn) and bad faith from others (Farage, Johnson).
-
BST, it looks like most of those that voted to leave as a protest, at just about everything want to ignore the massive amount of data that now exists showing it will be a frigging disaster and will even go as far as supporting Johnson and Farage to get it.
As someone wrote the other day the tories are now more a party of faith than of ideas and you'd have to go back to Ted Heath to find one of their leaders that really wanted to govern for the whole population.
-
Fascinating.
https://mobile.twitter.com/davies_will/status/1143860276430823425
If we had Ref2 and a transferrable vote, there's a decent chance that the result WOULD be a sensible, least damaging Brecit. Option three here, which has by far the highest number of first and second preferences.
Would that satisfy you Brexit supporters? I'd accept that as the option that resulted in least overall damage to the economy and social cohesion.
One thing is clear. No Deal wouldn't stand a chance. It is NOT what the public want. Clearly. So if that is rammed through, THAT would be a democratic outrage.
No interest in this then?
I'll give you my take.
The Leave vote was a knife edge decision.
That meant that if you REALLY wanted to take the majority of the country with you, you needed to go for the softest of Brexits. Which is option 3 on that poll. That's only the FIRST best for a minority of people, but a clear majority are prepared to take that as second best.
The May, Johnson and Farage won't accept that for party political reasons, because they want us out of the CU and SM. Despite having no majority wanting that. And despite Johnson and Farage specifically campaigning in 2016 for the sort of compromise type Brexit that they now say is a betrayal of The Will of The People.
Corbyn won't accept that because he wants us out of the SM for ideological reasons.
So we've had a total lack of vision on BOTH sides about what would actually be a sensible compromise that could take the country with them.
Instead, because the Right have been insisting on a Hard Brexit that is the first preference of a small minority, and doesn't even have majority support when you add in second preferences, there, we've headed into this polarised situation. Because the Brexit vote has been hijacked by the Right and interpreted as meaning a Hard Brexit, first choice opinion on the other side is to kill Brexit altogether.
And so, because there's no leadership for the soft compromise option, and because there is no possibility whatsoever of Johnson being able to re-negotiated the Withdrawal Agreement before October, we're now looking at the options being No Deal or No Brexit.
Didn't have to be like that, but that's where we are now. Instead of a compromise that everyone could have grumbled about but accepted, we're left with options that will seriously f**k off nearly half the population. All through pygmy leadership from some politicians (May, Corbyn) and bad faith from others (Farage, Johnson).
Corbyn said twice on Monday that any deal brought forward by a new PM (including no deal) should be put back to the people.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/jun/24/tory-leadership-latest-boris-johnson-jeremy-hunt-calls-boris-johnson-a-coward-for-dodging-tv-debates-and-interviews-live-news
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1143614438534238208
But don't let that stop you from misrepresenting him
-
Wilts.
Once again, you are reading what you want me to believe rather than what I am saying.
Is it correct that Corbyn has, from the moment of the vote in 2016, ruled out Labour actively supporting a Brexit that meant us staying in the Single Market?
That was what I said. Do you agree with that?
-
Sorry Billy, yes I didn't read your post properly and you are correct. Corbyn has never supported staying in the SM - but instead proposed having a new 'close strong relationship' to it.
Hence Labour supporting the Common Market 2.0 proposals in the indicative votes.
-
A parliamentary question by John Mann showed the following figures for medical expenses claimed between us and other Eu member countries. Britain paid £674 million and claimed £49 in return.
France claimed £147,685,772 Britain £6,730,292
Germany £ 25,873,954 £2,159,664
Italy £7,304,484 £1,510,850
Poland £4,336,701 £1,523,402
Spain £223,290,021 £3,412,338
were some of the biggest claimants from our NHS sort this sort of thing out and the NHS would not need any more money, we are being played for fools.
And the doctors want to go even further, it is time someone made the hospitals do their job, for the sake of every tax payer in the country.
DOES ANYONE THINK THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE ON THE SIDE OF A BUS?
-
Selby
1) Those figures aren't particularly surprising. There are a several hundred thousand UK ex-pat pensioners living in France and Spain. Inevitably, they will incur high medical costs. By contrast, most EU nationals living in the UK are prime age/health workers who require relatively little health treatment.
2) This doesn't cover the whole issue though. Another problem is that the NHS simply doesn't claim what it should from other countries for treating their citizens in the UK. The Nuffield Trust estimates that costs us £300m per year. That is 100% OUR problem, not the EU's.
3) Even if the £600m difference was genuinely due to us being screwed by the EU (it's not: see 1 and 2 above) it is chicken feed. It's less than 0.5% of the NHS budget. About 0.75% of the amount we've lost due to our depressed economic performance since the referendum. And less than 20% of the amount the Govt pissed up a wall on No Deal planning for the No Deal that never happened in March.
-
Wilts.
Thank you. We're agreed that Corbyn has wanted us out of the SM. I've no idea what "close, strong relationship to it" means. But then I've no idea what much that Corbyn says on this topic means. He's frequently said that we have to leave the SM because SM membership is only for EU members. Which, I'm sure surprises Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein who are SM members but not EU members.
You see my problem in not really understanding what Corbyn's take is on Brecit?
-
BST where do you get your figures from?
-
No problem Billy.
Corbyn's current position, as stated in the HoC on Monday, is that any deal the new PM comes up with should be put to a public vote. As I read it from the quotes in the link, if the new PM thinks this should be No Deal then that should be put to a public vote.
Nothing else really matters as he is the leader of the opposition and not in position to do or lead on anything else.
When he does speak on what Labour might do if they were in position to get a deal this has been decided by a small working group lead by Starmer. There is a good interview by Starmer on Brexitcast that I linked to a while back, where he discusses this.
The close to SM was Starmer's idea
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/05/labour-reveals-scheme-to-maintain-access-to-eu-single-market
-
Wilts.
1) Oh but Labour's policy on Brexit DOES matter. It's the reason that Labour has lost 6million supporters in 6 months. I think that matters rather a lot. Don't you?
2) The classic blame-shifting line is neat. It might work on someone who didn't follow politics closely. Unfortunately I do. And I recall very clearly that Statement was pushing very hard for SM membership to be kept as an option in 2017. He was very loudly and publicly slapped down by Corbyn. Starmer is now working within the limits set for him by Corbyn. As for "Close to". Corbyn was pushing something very similar in mid 2017. The problem is, it's never been explained why we shouldn't just stay in, and so this looks like political sleight of hand.
I said "neat" didn't I? It's actually quite dispiriting to see you trying to distance Corbyn from his own lifelong policy position. We KNOW Corbyn's take. You support the man. Embrace it!
-
Well, here's Owen Jones catching up with me about...err...24 months late.
I guess he's the next one for the Blairite/Centrist/NeoLib/Coup-Plotter treatment.
-
Well, here's Owen Jones catching up with me about...err...24 months late.
I guess he's the next one for the Blairite/Centrist/NeoLib/Coup-Plotter treatment.
This: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/27/soft-brexit-dead-labour-peoples-vote-referendum-remain
-
By the way Wilts. Yer man LeftyStats. Looks like he has got with the project too.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1144330523898257408
Another one for the little black book.
-
By the way, however you dress it up...
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/what-is-your-view-of-jeremy-corbyn-and-his-approach-to-brexit/
...it's just not working, is it?
-
Biily, I find that reply worrying, if you are quite happy to accept a massive fraud, or conversely people not doing their jobs correctly, that results in the tax payers of this country, and an institution that begs for more money at every opportunity, and the lefty cause that you and your party hold up as your main cause in parliament, and you are willing to dismiss it as nothing, a blip in the whole spend, just to try and project your constant bulling up of the EU shows your allegiance is not to your country, and the tax payers who fund our lifestyles but to the EU who do not publish accounts at all.
Are you quite prepared for older people to lie on beds in a corridor, while health tourists get treatment they are not entitled to to further your cause? and if they die hope that they voted to leave? so that's another one gone.
And this is only part of the problem, people from other parts of the world come here specifically to take advantage of our systems, but I suppose you would label myself or anyone else as racial for saying we are fools, and we should sack the people in the health service unwilling to rightfully charge for their services, your usual get out of jail card for people well versed in spending other peoples money.
I make no wonder the latest poll now shows that 57% are now in favour of leaving the EU.
-
Which poll Selby?
-
The one that was spoken about by a panel on talk radio this morning.
-
The one that was spoken about by a panel on talk radio this morning.
Which talk radio program Selby?
-
Bloody hell the Spanish inquisition, Mike Graham, yesterday or this mornings programme, Whats up does it frighten you?
-
Bloody hell the Spanish inquisition, Mike Graham, yesterday or this mornings programme, Whats up does it frighten you?
Sorry I thought you got our interest and then gone off to the pub, well all this information is important as it's the first poll to show such a result, I'm surprised it hasn't hit the headlines, thanks Selby, today or yesterday? no with second thoughts don't worry.
-
Sydney, I was listening while walking the dog.
-
Selby.
No of course I'm not happy about us not getting our shit together to charge for what we should be charging for. I'm equally unhappy about OUR issues being used to blame the EU.
-
Sydney, I was listening while walking the dog.
Groovin' along Selby?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6AZNywvF-s
-
Looking forward to being part of this trade deal, quite big apparently even though it took a while to nail down.
Maybe it means that some of the 4.7 million people now forced to earn a crust in the gig economy may get better jobs?
''EU and Mercosur agree huge trade deal after 20-year talks''
''The EU and South American economic bloc Mercosur have clinched a huge trade deal after 20 years of negotiations.
EU Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker said it was the EU's biggest deal to date and, at a time of trade tensions between the US and China, showed that "we stand for rules-based trade"''
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48807161
Oh shit I just remembered brexi...................t
-
Wilts.
1) Oh but Labour's policy on Brexit DOES matter. It's the reason that Labour has lost 6million supporters in 6 months. I think that matters rather a lot. Don't you?
2) The classic blame-shifting line is neat. It might work on someone who didn't follow politics closely. Unfortunately I do. And I recall very clearly that Statement was pushing very hard for SM membership to be kept as an option in 2017. He was very loudly and publicly slapped down by Corbyn. Starmer is now working within the limits set for him by Corbyn. As for "Close to". Corbyn was pushing something very similar in mid 2017. The problem is, it's never been explained why we shouldn't just stay in, and so this looks like political sleight of hand.
I said "neat" didn't I? It's actually quite dispiriting to see you trying to distance Corbyn from his own lifelong policy position. We KNOW Corbyn's take. You support the man. Embrace it!
The problem is Billy you are just blinded by your hatred of Corbyn. I give you evidence, newspaper articles, an interview by Starmer, that policy is not Corbyn's own personal policy but by a wider group. You might not like it - but it's true.
In Robert Peston's WTF he mentions the interview Corbyn did with Paxman during the 2017 Election. Paxman quizzed him on the Manifesto and asked him why things he had been campaigning for all his life weren't in it. 'Because I am a democrat' was Corbyn's answer.
If you don't like democracy then just keep attacking Corbyn and you will achieve your aim of keeping him and Labour out of government. In fact you will achieve the aim of those right wing journalists and lobby groups you keep railing about. Well done.
-
By the way Wilts. Yer man LeftyStats. Looks like he has got with the project too.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1144330523898257408
Another one for the little black book.
'Got with the project'?
It's a good account that provides statistical information to make policy decisions. They seem to appreciate the difficulties and problems that Corbyn has without bothering to resort to attacks on him and then wondering why this has an effect on support. Is that your 'project'?
https://mobile.twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1144566415892123648
-
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1144855050000510976?s=19 (https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1144855050000510976?s=19)
-
Wilts.
I'm seeing the problem here. Where this bunker mentality comes from.
You actually believe I hate Corbyn. You. Actually. Believe. That.
God help us. I don't hate Corbyn. I want him in No 10. I've campaigned for him in Elections (I assume you did the same for Blair and Brown...?)
I don't hate him. I just despair that he's f**king useless on several issues where his ideological fixations, and those of his advisers, push the Labour party into policy stances that have taken the party to the worst position since before the Treaty of Versailles.
But you carry on telling yourself that the problem is not Corbyn. It's everyone else who is wrong.
-
By 'got with the project', no, I don't mean attacked Corbyn. I mean, understood how dangerous Corbyn's Brexit policy is.
LeftyStats sums it up perfectly and much more pithily than I have. He says, "Labour winning without Leave supporters is difficult. Winning without Remain supporters is impossible."
That is the awful truth that Corbyn will not face up to. And it's the truth that you reject as coming from hatred of Corbyn.
-
Well now. This shows the disaster that Labour is now in.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/28/what-would-it-take-labour-win-general-election-new
Under a Corbyn leadership, Labour will be annihilated at a GE if it keeps its current Brexit stance according to those numbers. Even if Labour committed to Ref2 under Corbyn, most of the supporters that Labour have lost to the LDs and Greens ain't coming back.
Come on then lads. It's your party now, as several of you gleefully told me over the past 3 years.
What are you going to do?
See, because it's looking to me very much like you have f**ked the Labour party.
-
We may have to start cheering on Boris to maintain the rage :facepalm:
-
Oh this is delightful.
https://mobile.twitter.com/drdavidbull/status/1145597763998142465
"For some reason, the EU decided to put it's Parliament in a very strange place."
It's in Strasbourg. In the f**king centre of Western Europe you utter d**khead. What's your doctorate in? f**kwittery? Where did you expect it to be based? Milton f**king Keynes?
-
Oh this is delightful.
https://mobile.twitter.com/drdavidbull/status/1145597763998142465
"For some reason, the EU decided to put it's Parliament in a very strange place."
It's in Strasbourg. In the f**king centre of Western Europe you utter d**khead. What's your doctorate in? f**kwittery? Where did you expect it to be based? Milton f**king Keynes?
Dom Jolly's response sums it up: https://mobile.twitter.com/domjoly/status/1145952630755270656
-
Good to see the Brexit Party MEPs using all that tax payers' money that Bull (ahem...) was complaining about for travelling to Strasbourg in order to make a show of turning their backs on the opening of the Parliament.
I see Bull has tweeted today that they have gone there to represent the British people. That'll make a change. Farage has spent the past couple of decades collecting his MEP salary and expenses then not bothering to turn up to the vast majority of sittings and votes.
EDIT:
Oh aye. I forgot. Farage was using those expenses to illegally fund his work NOT as an MEP.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42669293
And, at the same time as collecting his 9000 Euros a month salary while not actually doing what an MEP was supposed to do, he was also taking the thick end of £0.5M from Arron Banks to fund other activities and not declaring that as a conflict of interests.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-investigation_uk_5ce41484e4b075a35a2e03b0?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACY4ex7opZ_I1pZSBvlsr5qjJXy0iX9tRbuXo4srz8VBgDNGyiK2kds0VEFZiclp8M1bF9RLMoiRr2yGKSPGHc0RjbtTy0Q2tZSanRLvEv4_owoIJ7oPQXzBL5DC_xRi63e4z1H5ajoHYU4W-sNyodDfccNqH12icGChz15ia7FN
Because, of course, anyone who is looking for a new career (while still taking a salary for not doing their existing job) needs access to a £4M Mayfair flat, a chauffeur-driven Range Rover and first class flights to the USA. Especially someone who is taking on the elite on behalf of the common man.
Ever think you've been played lads?
-
I see Widdecombe has been complaining that she was allocated a locker in Strasbourg that was out of her reach. I understand her frustration. The locker WAS placed in the 21st century, which is really unfair on her.
-
Fascinating behaviour in Strasbourg today. Now where before in history have you seen a political party turn their backs on their fellow democratically elected politicians.
Yup, right first time...
https://telescoper.wordpress.com/tag/nazi-party/
-
Good to see the Brexit Party MEPs using all that tax payers' money that Bull (ahem...) was complaining about for travelling to Strasbourg in order to make a show of turning their backs on the opening of the Parliament.
I see Bull has tweeted today that they have gone there to represent the British people. That'll make a change. Farage has spent the past couple of decades collecting his MEP salary and expenses then not bothering to turn up to the vast majority of sittings and votes.
EDIT:
Oh aye. I forgot. Farage was using those expenses to illegally fund his work NOT as an MEP.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42669293
And, at the same time as collecting his 9000 Euros a month salary while not actually doing what an MEP was supposed to do, he was also taking the thick end of £0.5M from Arron Banks to fund other activities and not declaring that as a conflict of interests.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-investigation_uk_5ce41484e4b075a35a2e03b0?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACY4ex7opZ_I1pZSBvlsr5qjJXy0iX9tRbuXo4srz8VBgDNGyiK2kds0VEFZiclp8M1bF9RLMoiRr2yGKSPGHc0RjbtTy0Q2tZSanRLvEv4_owoIJ7oPQXzBL5DC_xRi63e4z1H5ajoHYU4W-sNyodDfccNqH12icGChz15ia7FN
Because, of course, anyone who is looking for a new career (while still taking a salary for not doing their existing job) needs access to a £4M Mayfair flat, a chauffeur-driven Range Rover and first class flights to the USA. Especially someone who is taking on the elite on behalf of the common man.
Ever think you've been played lads?
I knew you'd bring up the back-turning business Billy; however, you've got the wrong end of the stick; they weren't turning their backs at the opening of Parliament, they were protesting at the playing of the national anthem for something that isn't a nation.
While we're on the subject, I notice you conveniently fail to mention the Lib Dem MEPs going into a political chamber of smartly dressed people, wearing scruffy T shirts with the usual foul-mouthed slogan on the back.
Glass houses, stones and all that?
-
Good to see the Brexit Party MEPs using all that tax payers' money that Bull (ahem...) was complaining about for travelling to Strasbourg in order to make a show of turning their backs on the opening of the Parliament.
I see Bull has tweeted today that they have gone there to represent the British people. That'll make a change. Farage has spent the past couple of decades collecting his MEP salary and expenses then not bothering to turn up to the vast majority of sittings and votes.
EDIT:
Oh aye. I forgot. Farage was using those expenses to illegally fund his work NOT as an MEP.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42669293
And, at the same time as collecting his 9000 Euros a month salary while not actually doing what an MEP was supposed to do, he was also taking the thick end of £0.5M from Arron Banks to fund other activities and not declaring that as a conflict of interests.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-investigation_uk_5ce41484e4b075a35a2e03b0?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACY4ex7opZ_I1pZSBvlsr5qjJXy0iX9tRbuXo4srz8VBgDNGyiK2kds0VEFZiclp8M1bF9RLMoiRr2yGKSPGHc0RjbtTy0Q2tZSanRLvEv4_owoIJ7oPQXzBL5DC_xRi63e4z1H5ajoHYU4W-sNyodDfccNqH12icGChz15ia7FN
Because, of course, anyone who is looking for a new career (while still taking a salary for not doing their existing job) needs access to a £4M Mayfair flat, a chauffeur-driven Range Rover and first class flights to the USA. Especially someone who is taking on the elite on behalf of the common man.
Ever think you've been played lads?
I knew you'd bring up the back-turning business Billy; however, you've got the wrong end of the stick; they weren't turning their backs at the opening of Parliament, they were protesting at the playing of the national anthem for something that isn't a nation.
While we're on the subject, I notice you conveniently fail to mention the Lib Dem MEPs going into a political chamber of smartly dressed people, wearing scruffy T shirts with the usual foul-mouthed slogan on the back.
Glass houses, stones and all that?
Errr Steve, if the EU isn't a nation (which it isn't) how can it have a national anthem?
The Ode to Joy is the anthem of the European Union. The European Parliament is the democratically elected legislative body of the European Union. To which members of the Brexit Party put themselves forward to represent the UK at. That's ALL the people of the UK. If they don't like it - don't go. Like Sinn Fein.
I agree about the Lib Dems, that was also pathetic. If you want to join in a protest stand outside. In Parliament they are there to represent all their constituents - whichever way they voted.
-
Agreed on all of that Wilts.
Farage is back to grandstanding which is all he ever does in Strasbourg.
SS. What about Farage's expenses and undeclared payments from Banks? Any thoughts?
-
Presumably they'd also turn their backs on the Olympic Anthem because the Olympics aren't a nation either. Daft t**ts.
-
Agreed on all of that Wilts.
Farage is back to grandstanding which is all he ever does in Strasbourg.
SS. What about Farage's expenses and undeclared payments from Banks? Any thoughts?
at the minute thou they have done nothing illegal
-
That applied to a lot of MPs that ended up paying back expenses.😉
-
Agreed on all of that Wilts.
Farage is back to grandstanding which is all he ever does in Strasbourg.
SS. What about Farage's expenses and undeclared payments from Banks? Any thoughts?
at the minute thou they have done nothing illegal
Well, Farage did have €35,000 docked from his pay last year to cover the expenses he'd claimed for a staff member that never worked on EU business.
-
That applied to a lot of MPs that ended up paying back expenses.😉
Yes. And they were rightly castigated for it.
Farage continues to be untouchable for 25% of the population. It baffles me. They actually think he's on their side!
-
Looks like there's previous in terms of politicians in Europe turning their backs.
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-members-the-nsdap-in-the-reichstag-1930-36997280.html
Who'd have thought it.
Anyway, as a bit of light relief, I heard someone tonight describe the perfect noun for the Farageists turning to show the side other than their front.
Backgammon.
-
It just came across as childish to me. They are supposed to be grown adults and getting very well paid for the job they do.
-
Again, where is the condemnation of the Lib Dems from all of you? because so far only Wilts has had the honesty to express how pathetic it was.
-
SS
I think you must have missed the bit where I said I agreed 100% with all of Wilts's post.
-
SS
I think you must have missed the bit where I said I agreed 100% with all of Wilts's post.
So you did Billy; my apologies.
-
No problem SS.
There's a couple of bigger issues with Farage and he is mob's antics though. Anyone who reacts negatively to hearing Beethoven's 9th needs to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror. It's one of the pinnacles of human achievement..
And acting divisively in Strasbourg of all places. There's been more wars fought over Strasbourg than any other place on earth. All down to competitive petty nationalism. That idiot Bull might want to reflect on why the EU Parliament is there. What it symbolises. And how stupidly dangerous it is trying to undermine the EU in an era when aggressive nationalism is on the rise across the globe.
I've pointed out before that between 100BC and 1945, an army crossed the Rhine to do battle once every 37 years on average. Countless millions of lives have been lost because of that. The fundamental purpose of the EU was to make that happening again unthinkable.
-
Ann Widdecombe in the European Parliament
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1146727990627381253
-
Ann Widdecombe in the European Parliament
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1146727990627381253
https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1146725047727509506?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1146725047727509506?s=19)
This made me chuckle.
-
Ann Widdecombe in the European Parliament
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1146727990627381253
A representative of a former empire that ACTUALLY enslaved, brutalised and massacred people accuses a voluntary international community of enslavement! You really couldn't make this up. :turd:
-
Ann Widdecombe in the European Parliament
https://twitter.com/ChrisMasonBBC/status/1146727990627381253
A representative of a former empire that ACTUALLY enslaved, brutalised and massacred people accuses a voluntary international community of enslavement! You really couldn't make this up. :turd:
She did and people will vote for her.
-
If we, collectively, can't do better than this stupidity of the likes of Widdecombe...if we actually support it and allow it to represent us, we entirely deserve the future that's coming.
What a national embarrassment.
I was away with work yesterday. Stayed in a cheapish hotel. Got talking over breakfast with a middle aged German bloke who has come to the UK to visit his daughter at the end of her academic year at a UK university.
He was incredulous at what we are doing. Genuinely baffled and sad for us. Couldn't believe that a Britain that (his words) is a perfect example of hard-headed common sense is allowing itself to be represented and guided and deeply damaged by these clowns.
It's like were walking drugged into this. A Brecit that will cement Johnson as PM and put money into the pockets of spivs, while giving the rest of us a poorer and harsher and less respected future.
-
She wouldn't have been out of place in League of Gentleman with yesterday's speech.
You can't believe anybody would consider it anything than utter drivel, posture and posing.
-
If Margaret Thatcher had made the same speech the BBC and the Tory press would have lauded it.
-
Selby.
Margaret Thatcher was a sane, rational and competent politician.
Ann Widdecombe is a batshit nut job.
God knows how much I disliked Thatcher's policies, but she would never have made a speech like that. It shows how far down the slide we've gone where you are supporting and justifying that idiocy from Widdecombe.
-
Selby.
Margaret Thatcher was a sane, rational and competent politician.
Ann Widdecombe is a batshit nut job.
God knows how much I disliked Thatcher's policies, but she would never have made a speech like that. It shows how far down the slide we've gone where you are supporting and justifying that idiocy from Widdecombe.
One hopes that she is unwell, at least there would be the possibility of a recovery.
-
Billy I am not supporting it at all, just pointing out that the politics of Thatchers time would have responded differently in my opinion, given the same stand off on Brexit that is now the case.
Strong anti EU talk would have been much more acceptable in Thatchers time in power, its just a generational thing. The younger generations are much more touchy and easily offended, when it suits them that is.
-
Yeah, but Thatcher would no have allowed the lunatics to take over the asylum and drive us into this stupidity.
This is all the doing of a few dozen right wing nut job politicians. There was never a drive in the country for this until those politicians started stoking it up. For their own aims.
-
What does the world think of Boris Johnson?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zotVME8jdaI
-
What does the world think of Boris Johnson?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zotVME8jdaI
Boris the mini trump, May was an idiot appointing a fool as foreign secretary and boris didn't let anyone down he reminds me of an alpaca but not as smart.
-
The really smart people in the race for PM are the business interests behind Mark Textor and Lynton Crosby as they are getting what they want via their stooge boris and boris is paying Textor and Crosby to get elected, neat aye?
-
By the way Selby. You can scour the records all you like for "Strong anti-EU talk" back in the 80s,comparing the EU to slave masters, colonialists or the USSR as people routinely do today. Go on. I challenge you.
No. It's not about people today being snowflakes who get upset at "tough talk". It's about a debasing of language and a radicalisation of ideas on the Right, by a small group of politicians who are playing YOU to help THEM. And you are willingly going along with it. And turning a blind eye to how they have poisoned our debate.
-
''Ex-MI6 chief: UK going through 'political nervous breakdown'
Sir John Sawers says Brexit has left country divided and damaged its global reputation''
This is why he has a knighthood and why he's paid so much yeah?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/06/ex-mi6-chief-uk-going-through-political-nervous-breakdown
-
Labour back second referendum - and peers resign whip over ‘anti-semitism'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtWMuRRVGKY
-
It's good that there are some sensible people with influence to stop a complete disaster, from there we could possibly turn this mess around.
''I’ll take you to court to block a no-deal Brexit, Gina Miller tells Boris Johnson''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/14/gina-miller-legal-action-block-no-deal-brexit-boris-johnson
-
Another prominent Brexit Party member barely on nodding terms with the truth.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1151165049706299392
A bit of context. She worked for Cambridge Analytica on the Kenyan election, in which they poured misinformation into the social media streams of people who'd been profiled through their Facebook usage as being susceptible to being misled by lies about the Opposition (sound familiar).
She's now a BP MEP.
Several journalists have said she worked for CA and have been threatened with legal action by her for libel.
Turns out she must have just forgotten that she DID work for CA. Easy done I suppose. Seems like BP folk regularly forget stuff they've done before.
-
Another prominent Brexit Party member barely on nodding terms with the truth.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1151165049706299392
A bit of context. She worked for Cambridge Analytica on the Kenyan election, in which they poured misinformation into the social media streams of people who'd been profiled through their Facebook usage as being susceptible to being misled by lies about the Opposition (sound familiar).
She's now a BP MEP.
Several journalists have said she worked for CA and have been threatened with legal action by her for libel.
Turns out she must have just forgotten that she DID work for CA. Easy done I suppose. Seems like BP folk regularly forget stuff they've done before.
I would be pretty pissed off if I had received any of this shit (not that I have ever been a member of fb) because what it says about those that have received it is that they are gullible and uninformed.
''gullible
/ˈɡʌləb(ə)l/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
adjective: gullible
easily persuaded to believe something; credulous.
"an attempt to persuade a gullible public to spend their money"
synonyms: credulous, over-trusting, over-trustful, trustful, easily deceived/led, easily taken in, exploitable, dupable, deceivable, impressionable, unsuspecting, unsuspicious, unwary, unguarded, unsceptical, ingenuous, naive, innocent, simple, inexperienced, unworldly, green, as green as grass, childlike, ignorant; More
foolish, silly;
informalwet behind the ears, born yesterday
"the swindler preyed upon gullible old women"
-
''No-deal Brexit 'would send UK into recession', forecasters fear - business''
But apparently they have released this forecast before speaking to the brains trust on the Viking Chat Forum.
''A new healthcheck on Britain’s economy is expected to warn today that a no-deal Brexit would plunge the country into recession.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (the fiscal watchdog) will outline how the UK economy would suffer if Britain fell out of the EU without a deal.
Under the OBR’s no-deal scenario, the UK economy would contract in 2020, and end up 3% smaller in five years time.
The warning will come in the OBR’s new Fiscal Risks Report for 2019, released today. This is a serious, weighty report, looking at the strength and weaknesses of the UK public finances, and the threats which could undermine them in the future''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2019/jul/18/no-deal-brexit-uk-recession-obr-fiscal-risks-retail-sales-business.
-
''No-deal Brexit 'would send UK into recession', forecasters fear - business''
But apparently they have released this forecast before speaking to the brains trust on the Viking Chat Forum.
''A new healthcheck on Britain’s economy is expected to warn today that a no-deal Brexit would plunge the country into recession.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (the fiscal watchdog) will outline how the UK economy would suffer if Britain fell out of the EU without a deal.
Under the OBR’s no-deal scenario, the UK economy would contract in 2020, and end up 3% smaller in five years time.
The warning will come in the OBR’s new Fiscal Risks Report for 2019, released today. This is a serious, weighty report, looking at the strength and weaknesses of the UK public finances, and the threats which could undermine them in the future''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2019/jul/18/no-deal-brexit-uk-recession-obr-fiscal-risks-retail-sales-business.
You mean they haven't even consulted you? How stupid of them!
-
perverse
/pəˈvəːs/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
adjective: perverse
1.
showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable.
"Kate's perverse decision not to cooperate held good"
synonyms: awkward, contrary, difficult, unreasonable, uncooperative, unhelpful, obstructive, disobliging, unaccommodating, troublesome, tiresome, annoying, vexatious, obstreperous, disobedient, unmanageable, uncontrollable, recalcitrant, refractory, rebellious; More
wilful, headstrong, self-willed, capricious, wayward, cross-grained, stubborn, obstinate, obdurate, pertinacious, mulish, pig-headed, bull-headed, intractable, intransigent, inflexible;
thrawn;
informalcussed;
informalbloody-minded, bolshie, stroppy;
informalbalky;
archaicfroward, contumacious;
rarecontrarious
"he is being deliberately perverse"
antonyms: accommodating, cooperative
2.
contrary to the accepted or expected standard or practice.
"in two general elections the outcome was quite perverse"
synonyms: illogical, irrational, unreasonable, contradictory, wrong, wrong-headed, incorrect, irregular, inappropriate, unorthodox; informalbackasswards
"juries often come up with a verdict that is manifestly perverse"
antonyms: reasonable
Law
(of a verdict) against the weight of evidence or the direction of the judge on a point of law.
-
I don't think the forecasters are quite that bad, but you'd have thought they would have consulted you, I agree.
-
Interesting how much the goalposts have shifted on Brexit. At first it was going to be the greatest thing ever, ushering in a great new era for Britain. There'd be a smile on the face of every child and money in everyone's pockets. Now we have Boris Johnson on stage waving a fish about and saying we will still have drinking water and planes will still fly. And people are still fired up about the whole thing. Truly strange times.
-
Interesting how much the goalposts have shifted on Brexit. At first it was going to be the greatest thing ever, ushering in a great new era for Britain. There'd be a smile on the face of every child and money in everyone's pockets. Now we have Boris Johnson on stage waving a fish about and saying we will still have drinking water and planes will still fly. And people are still fired up about the whole thing. Truly strange times.
Truly strange people MM
-
'''Like Corporal Jones ... running around like idiots' - European commissioner ridicules UK's Brexit negotiators
Tonight the BBC is showing a Panorama programme made by Nick Robinson exploring why the Brexit talks failed. Among the people he interviewed was Frans Timmermans, the first vice president of the European commission.
As Politico Europe reports, Timmermans said that before the negotiations started the EU assumed that the British team would be “brilliant” because of the professionalism of their civil service. But the EU quickly realised this was not the case, Timmermans said. He went on:
And then the first time I saw public utterances by David Davis and I saw him not coming [to Brussels], not negotiating, grandstanding elsewhere I thought: ‘Oh my God, they haven’t got a plan, they haven’t got a plan’.
That was really shocking frankly, because the damage if you don’t have a plan — you know, we see it — time’s running out and you don’t have a plan, it’s like Lance Corporal Jones — you know, ‘Don’t panic, don’t panic’, running around like idiots''
Frans Timmermans, what would he know?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_Timmermans#Honours_and_decorations
-
When all the civil servants in the Brexit Department had to be almost forcibly seconded from other departments (because no-one wanted to go there) and those seconded had no knowledge of the matter at hand because they came from departments dealing with other specialisms, it didn't bode well for the professionalism immediately expected of them. There was no way on God's Earth they would be anywhere up to speed on the intricacies of EU Law and International Trade. Perhaps too much was relied on the EU falling over themselves to give us everything we wanted because 'they need us more than we need them'?
-
Argh!
The architects of this shit storm knew and know damn well that the EU wasn't going to fall over themselves to give us everything we wanted. It's not difficult to see that, and Farage, Johnson, Davis, Gove, Rees-Mogg etc are anything but stupid.
They KNOW that we're not going to get a deal that is better than staying in. But it was never, ever about what was good for the country.
Period.
You have to understand that if you're going to see the logic.
The entire Brexit process has been about a fight for the heart and soul of the Right wing in British politics. It's been won hands down by the far-right and we're about to get a PM who has sold whatever soul he had to the Farageist. Those of you who claim to be left wing and have supported Brexit, that's what you've done.
-
The most interesting outcome being played out at the moment is how both the left leaning parties in the USA and Britain, the Democrats and the Labour party are losing popularity, and in some ways credibility.
The labour party is falling apart, losing voters every month, and falling further behind. With any past leadership and common sense policies they would be romping it, but the career politicians that front them now, straight out of university, with no life experience, smug attitudes, and political correctness coming out of their ears are just a turn off.
-
The only good thing about it being Johnson that's sold his soul to Farage and the ERG is that's he's just as likely to welsh on them as he has everybody else who aren't any use to him personally any more.
-
The most interesting outcome being played out at the moment is how both the left leaning parties in the USA and Britain, the Democrats and the Labour party are losing popularity, and in some ways credibility.
The labour party is falling apart, losing voters every month, and falling further behind. With any past leadership and common sense policies they would be romping it, but the career politicians that front them now, straight out of university, with no life experience, smug attitudes, and political correctness coming out of their ears are just a turn off.
In Labour's case it's nothing to do with Brexit, its internal due to the uselessness of the leadership.
-
Selby.
Do you ever leave the house? Those opinions about Labour politicians are years out of date.
There are many things you can have a pop at Labour politicians for, but lack of life experience is hardly one of them.
Yes, Corbyn has been a life-long politician or activist, but most of the rest of the Shadow Cabinet had extensive careers outside politics.
John McDonnell worked for a trades union for a decade.
Keir Starmer, Emily Thornberry and Andy McDonald each worked for over 20 years as solicitors/barristers. Richard Burgon did for over a decade.
Dianne Abbott was a civil servant and a researcher for Thames Television and GMTV.
Angela Rayner worked as a care assistant.
Nia Griffiths and Margaret Greenwood had long careers as teachers.
I don't know where you get these stereotypes from.
Granted, the next PM has done shite all other than be sacked from a series of journalist jobs, but there you go.
-
The most interesting outcome being played out at the moment is how both the left leaning parties in the USA and Britain, the Democrats and the Labour party are losing popularity, and in some ways credibility.
The labour party is falling apart, losing voters every month, and falling further behind. With any past leadership and common sense policies they would be romping it, but the career politicians that front them now, straight out of university, with no life experience, smug attitudes, and political correctness coming out of their ears are just a turn off.
Well I suppose if you ignore the Survation poll at the weekend that gave Labour a 6 point lead and most US polls then you are correct.
Which Labour politicians are you referring to btw?
-
Interesting how much the goalposts have shifted on Brexit. At first it was going to be the greatest thing ever, ushering in a great new era for Britain. There'd be a smile on the face of every child and money in everyone's pockets. Now we have Boris Johnson on stage waving a fish about and saying we will still have drinking water and planes will still fly. And people are still fired up about the whole thing. Truly strange times.
You're completely missing the point. People aren't fired up about the WHOLE thing; they're fired up about Parliament telling 17.4 million people to f*ck off.
-
SS
Argh! It's the ERG that prevented May's deal going through! Brexiters voted against a hard Brexit because they decided after the 2016 vote that a hard Brexit wasn't enough!
You could have had Brexit by now if the hardest of Brexiters had been prepared to compromise.
So who exactly are you blaming?
-
Interesting how much the goalposts have shifted on Brexit. At first it was going to be the greatest thing ever, ushering in a great new era for Britain. There'd be a smile on the face of every child and money in everyone's pockets. Now we have Boris Johnson on stage waving a fish about and saying we will still have drinking water and planes will still fly. And people are still fired up about the whole thing. Truly strange times.
You're completely missing the point. People aren't fired up about the WHOLE thing; they're fired up about Parliament telling 17.4 million people to f*ck off.
You're also missing a point. The point that Parliament is there to represent the whole of the 65mill+ of the British population. MPs are there to represent ALL of their constituents. Or do you think that MPs should only represent their constituents that voted for them, and don't have to bother representing their constituents that didn't vote for them?
-
You're all missing the point. I was pointing out exactly what it is that people are fired up about. You're all saying why people shouldn't be fired up about that; a different thing altogether.
-
Glyn , you have missed the point that MP's are only worried about being re elected, and don't give two hoots about their constituents.
That's why the letter signed by twenty odd, with up to a reported another twenty plus labour MP's from their northern heartlands are saying they will now vote for Brexit.
-
SS
Why do you think.people are fired up about that?
-
Glyn , you have missed the point that MP's are only worried about being re elected, and don't give two hoots about their constituents.
That's why the letter signed by twenty odd, with up to a reported another twenty plus labour MP's from their northern heartlands are saying they will now vote for Brexit.
If that was the case, why are so many of them apparently risking not being re-elected by opposing a bad deal and also no deal? Sounds like a case of sticking to their principles rather than naked self-interest to me.
-
Christ up above, it's like "Slag-off an MP with a thoughtless insult" Bingo tonight.
-
Well Selby just went with the 'slag all MPs with a thoughtless insult' gambit, and completely ignoring an MPs constitutional responsibilty.
-
SS
Why do you think.people are fired up about that?
You know what I think. The people of this country gave Parliament a mandate 3 years ago. They've refused to deliver it.
-
Right.
And, once again. What WAS that mandate?
-
SS
Why do you think.people are fired up about that?
You know what I think. The people of this country gave Parliament a mandate 3 years ago. They've refused to deliver it.
And Theresa May took that mandate to the people in a GE where she asked them to give her a bigger majority so she could deliver a 'Brexit Means Brexit' and the people said 'Nah, don't fancy that'.
-
I give up. It's impossible.
All I know is that this country's f*cked forever.
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
You're talking to a wall.
I'm glad some MPs have rebelled and put country before themselves or their party.
-
No one likes a sore winner!
''Revenue chief who received death threats over Brexit steps down''
''The straight-talking Thompson, who joined in 2016, was highly regarded in the civil service and was not afraid of telling inconvenient truths about the cost of Brexit at his numerous appearances at select committees.
As early as September 2017 he was warning the government about Brexit fantasies, telling a select committee that border and tax checks after Brexit could require an extra 5,000 staff, with new customs checks costing the taxpayer up to £800m''
''Last year he revealed he received death threats after disclosing that the post-EU customs option preferred by Brexiters would cost up to £20bn''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/revenue-chief-quits-after-death-threats-over-brexit-warnings
Jon Thompson, what would he know?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Thompson_(civil_servant)
-
Yeah, I know that. But you have to keep on talking. Maybe the penny drops eventually.
-
SS
Why do you think.people are fired up about that?
You know what I think. The people of this country gave Parliament a mandate 3 years ago. They've refused to deliver it.
What about the mandate given Parliament 2 years ago?
-
Boris Johnson is not up to this and way out of his depth. He would have been struggling before but now a majority vote has passed to block any attempt to suspend parliament means that serious negotiations have to take place and that is something beyond his attention span.
Edit: In a three way run off for the leadership I would give it to the kipper.
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
reading this post about "binary referendums" i took up the challenge to search for a tertiary referendum - the 3rd option presumably being dont .care. a f*ck for countries that force you to vote eg Australia ?
interestingly found this from 2017
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/paul-goldsmith/why-tertiary-legislation-hidden_b_18535692.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGcF0xh1yoO1oAPOgKllXIONX0NYbTMSCHge7Ts9Zot5acapEj6bW7wxO-_RkNhWyYenwwULQDyac3W47BC5HCwDmuf7L70JMDhy8WjKsu-ytjGYQUL2qHy_hkFYwf85lCP59yrevegGagG-01hbIF0T5dGmDj5X0lg_6vC04KMf
which mentions tertiary legislation
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
You're talking to a wall.
I'm glad some MPs have rebelled and put country before themselves or their party.
Before themselves and their REMAIN views? You're having a laugh if you expect us to swallow that.
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
You're talking to a wall.
I'm glad some MPs have rebelled and put country before themselves or their party.
Before themselves and their REMAIN views? You're having a laugh if you expect us to swallow that.
Yeah, the ERG and the DUP are well known for being militant Remoaners! :silly:
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
No, what's spellbindingly bleeding obvious is that the one thing you've missed off that list is THE thing that it's all about - REMAIN.
The majority of Parliament want us to Remain, and are determined to block any form of Brexit. If you can't see that, then it's me who's talking to a wall.
-
SS
We've been over this for 3 years. Do you still not get the root cause of the problem?
There is no one defined thing that is Brexit. THAT'S the problem. No one agrees in what it means.
So saying "You got a mandate - get on with it!" is childish nonsense. Get on with WHAT? No Deal, May Deal, Canada Deal, Canada+, Norway Deal, Norway+? Every one of those would be A Brexit. But no-one can agree on which one the mandate was for
Do you not see that? It's spellbindingly bleeding obvious!
No, what's spellbindingly bleeding obvious is that the one thing you've missed off that list is THE thing that it's all about - REMAIN.
The majority of Parliament want us to Remain, and are determined to block any form of Brexit. If you can't see that, then it's me who's talking to a wall.
Actually in pure voting terms you are wrong Steve. Most of the Tory Party voted for May's deal 3rd time out. The ERG/DUP voted for No Deal. Most of the Labour Party voted for Common Market 2.0. 4 votes on a 2nd referendum have been well short of a majority.
So Parliament will vote for Brexit, but just as Billy said, they wont vote for the same Brexit.
-
Thanks for that Wilts. As usual, your post is much calmer and more composed than your colleagues.
It sounds as though you think Boris might get something over the line. I wish I could believe that.
-
Johnson is highly unlikely to get anything over the line.
Once you take the position that we're leaving the CU, the EU isn't going to budge from its position that there is no deal on offer unless we agree to the Irish backstop.
But the ERG and DUP won't support the backstop. So that can't pass in Parliament.
The only other option then is No Deal. But it's clear that Parliament will not allow that. Quite correctly, because to do so would be the biggest act of self-harm in British history, and a complete betrayal of the democratic process, since there has never been a majority in the country supporting No Deal, and it was never seriously mentioned in 2016.
Reight f**king mess of Johnson's own making. If there's one tiny bright spot in the whole shambles, it's that at least the bas**rd who tipped us into this mess now has to own it and be defined by it.
-
It’s most of the mps fault to be fair, leaving with a no deal might be a stupid idea but trying to take it off the table is ridiculous, we might never had got a good deal but without the threat of no deal the eu new we would never leave
-
Bpool.
Christ, here we go again.
A threat isn't a threat if it's totally unbelievable. Threatening to walk away with no deal is stupid. Because everyone knows we won't do it. Because it would be horrifically damaging to our economy. May TRIED that. Remember all the "No Deal is better than a bad deal" b*llocks? It didn't work, because the EU said, "Really? Go on then." In the full knowledge that no country is stupid enough to do that.
And in any case, what would you have expected the EU to give us even if they HAD taken that threat seriously?
That's the biggest problem for me in talking to any Leave supporter. They say we should have got a better deal, but they never, EVER say what that means. What better deal should we have got through threatening to f**k up our own economy?
-
Here we go again bst! If you take your barganing chips off the table you will never get anything in life
-
To set off a nuclear weapon would be a stupid idea to but countries use them as a deterrent, you could be right it might be awful for our economy but it would be for the eu as well, then it’s a lose lose situation and maybe just maybe you would have a chance at getting a better deal, take it off you have none, can you not see that? If you were prime minister bst and had no option but to do brexit would you try and negotiate with no deal?
-
Here we go again bst! If you take your barganing chips off the table you will never get anything in life
OK then, Johnson is going to put those chips back on the table again. What do you expect that to get him?
-
I’ve no idea Glynn probably more than taking it off at a guess would you not think?
-
Bpool.
I truly despair. That is the worst analogy I've ever heard.
Nuclear deterence works because it is a final backstop against existential failure. It is one side saying to the other "Don't think about invading us, or attacking our existential vital interests, because if you out us in a position where we have nothing to lose, we will take you down with us.
How in God's name does that port across as a lesson for the Brexit talks?
And, I say again. Even if it did, what, precisely, do you think we should have got from the negotiations that we didn't?
-
I’ve no idea Glynn probably more than taking it off at a guess would you not think?
No I don't think. We got May's deal with it on the table. What difference did it make? None as far as I can see because just threatening No Deal won't make the EU change their rules, they'll just let us go and make the best of it they can. It has no leverage at all.
And Boris putting it back on the table will achieve bugger all. Even he won't say what he thinks it will get him.
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
What did we get out of them at the last minute in March?
As for what the EU think, they've been telling everybody since before the referendum even took place. If you bother to listen to them. But if it makes you feel better, just pretend it's only my opinion if you want.
-
Aye. David Davies kept saying '
They'll change their minds at the last minute and give us the deal we want'
Still waiting....
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
A last minute change of heart about WHAT?
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
A last minute change of heart about WHAT?
Getting fed up of us complaining, moaning, being unable to decide what we want and kicking us out without a deal - then telling us never to come back and take out non-existent ferries with us.
That'll teach them bloomin ferriners. It will serve them right when we have food shortages because the ports are blocked up, see how they like it then...
-
Man 1: We need to get more from the EU. The EU has not given us a fair deal.
Man 2: What more do you think we should have got?
Man 1: Mumbles incoherently....But it's all the Remainers' fault!
-
EU: Hey, hang on a minute, apparently, there are STILL some Remainers in the UK!
-
To set off a nuclear weapon would be a stupid idea to but countries use them as a deterrent, you could be right it might be awful for our economy but it would be for the eu as well, then it’s a lose lose situation and maybe just maybe you would have a chance at getting a better deal, take it off you have none, can you not see that? If you were prime minister bst and had no option but to do brexit would you try and negotiate with no deal?
And BP it might just blow up in your face, johnson has been undermining the EU forever and now he fancies himself as Churchill.
johnson is the perfect w**ker in every way.
Negotiating with no-deal as we have all said before is as dumb as saying if you don't let me have my rattle back I'm going to kick myself in the balls.
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
A last minute change of heart about WHAT?
Getting fed up of us complaining, moaning, being unable to decide what we want and kicking us out without a deal - then telling us never to come back and take out non-existent ferries with us.
That'll teach them bloomin ferriners. It will serve them right when we have food shortages because the ports are blocked up, see how they like it then...
why bring foreigners into it? You need calm down a little lol 😂
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
What did we get out of them at the last minute in March?
As for what the EU think, they've been telling everybody since before the referendum even took place. If you bother to listen to them. But if it makes you feel better, just pretend it's only my opinion if you want.
we didn’t get anything that’s my point barnier even said they he new that we woukd not leave with no deal under may
-
To set off a nuclear weapon would be a stupid idea to but countries use them as a deterrent, you could be right it might be awful for our economy but it would be for the eu as well, then it’s a lose lose situation and maybe just maybe you would have a chance at getting a better deal, take it off you have none, can you not see that? If you were prime minister bst and had no option but to do brexit would you try and negotiate with no deal?
And BP it might just blow up in your face, johnson has been undermining the EU forever and now he fancies himself as Churchill.
johnson is the perfect w**ker in every way.
Negotiating with no-deal as we have all said before is as dumb as saying if you don't let me have my rattle back I'm going to kick myself in the balls.
if you read what I said I never said leave with no deal I said keep it on the table, whoever is in the Tory party Sydney you will call a w**ker! Would you vote for a party that has always had a higher un employment when they leave office to when they took office? If you would surely that would be rather silly
-
To set off a nuclear weapon would be a stupid idea to but countries use them as a deterrent, you could be right it might be awful for our economy but it would be for the eu as well, then it’s a lose lose situation and maybe just maybe you would have a chance at getting a better deal, take it off you have none, can you not see that? If you were prime minister bst and had no option but to do brexit would you try and negotiate with no deal?
And BP it might just blow up in your face, johnson has been undermining the EU forever and now he fancies himself as Churchill.
johnson is the perfect w**ker in every way.
Negotiating with no-deal as we have all said before is as dumb as saying if you don't let me have my rattle back I'm going to kick myself in the balls.
if you read what I said I never said leave with no deal I said keep it on the table, whoever is in the Tory party Sydney you will call a w**ker! Would you vote for a party that has always had a higher un employment when they leave office to when they took office? If you would surely that would be rather silly
I reserve that special tag w**ker just for boris because that's what a w**kers is someone that talks but never walks.
I and others are trying to get through to you that you can't negotiate using no-deal as a lever because as the road-runner finds out time after time it blows up in his face. beep beep
-
Let’s wait and see the eu are known to have last minute change of hearts, if he can’t get anything better out of it then maybe it’s time for a re think but at least give him the chance, and it surprises me how you actually know Glynn what the eu think all it is, is your opinion
What did we get out of them at the last minute in March?
As for what the EU think, they've been telling everybody since before the referendum even took place. If you bother to listen to them. But if it makes you feel better, just pretend it's only my opinion if you want.
we didn’t get anything that’s my point barnier even said they he new that we woukd not leave with no deal under may
Of COURSE he knew we wouldn't leave with No Deal. Every sentient person on the planet knows we won't leave with No Deal, because it'll cost us £1trn over the next decade. So threatening it is just f**king stupid, because it is not believable.
This isn't like haggling over a used car.
Anyway. What deal do you think we might have got if we'd threatened to leave with No Deal and Barnier had shite it and given us what we wanted?
-
''Brexit funder Arron Banks threatens Netflix over Great Hack documentary''
''The Great Hack’s co-director Karim Amer said: “We have received a letter from Arron Banks’s solicitors, which we have responded to, making clear that we stand by the contents of the film and will vigorously defend against any claim. We find it ridiculous that Arron Banks and his solicitors would issue such a letter without having seen the actual film''
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/20/arron-banks-netflix-threat-great-hack-documentary
Here's how you can help, boycott this company's products.
https://eldoninsurance.co.uk/
-
Some interesting news on the actual effect of No Deal that people may be interested in.
Given all that is going on it may have escaped your notice that Andrew Percy, MP for Brigg & Goole (a Johnson supporters, he was one of the people trotted out on the radio to say how great he would be as PM) resigned today as the trade envoy to Canada. Quoting the lack of understanding in government of what no deal would mean - as the Canadians have shown.
Canada have a trade deal with the EU known as CETA. The UK have asked Canada to roll over CETA after Brexit. However the Canadians have refused as we have already said that in the event of No Deal we will scrap import tariffs, that will actually give Canadian exporters to the UK better terms than they have under CETA.
But the Canadians are not going to reciprocate. Instead they are going to raise their tariffs on British goods. For instance a block of cheese that currently has 0% tariff will be increased 245%!
That's what 'we hold all the cards' means in practice...
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1153375136000729089
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-latest-trade-envoy-quit-deal-canada-a9012421.html
-
So effectively zero exports to Canada Wilts.
They don't know what they don't know.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
-
Considering the bar for Brexiter MPs is set at "not knowing how important the Dover - Calais crossing is", I'm not surprised.
-
''According to Jim Pickard and Gillian Tett in today’s Financial Times (paywall), Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, and some Donald Trump supporters in the US are backing a new group, World4Brexit, which is being set up to lobby for Brexit. Farage told the FT he was not convinced Boris Johnson will deliver Brexit''
Excellent, just what we want more foreign influence.
But I like this type of foreign influence! ha
Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the US House of Representatives, has restated her view that congress will not pass a UK-US trade deal if Boris Johnson’s government puts the open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland at risk, the Irish Times reports. Pelosi said:
We made it clear in our conversations with senior members of the Conservative party earlier this year that there should be no return to a hard border on the island. That position has not changed. Any trade deal between the US and Great Britain would have to be cognisant of that.
-
''Hammond plots with Labour to kill Johnson’s no-deal Brexit''
''The former Tory chancellor Philip Hammond held private talks with Labour’s Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer shortly before Boris Johnson entered Downing Street last Wednesday, to plot cross-party moves aimed at preventing the new prime minister agreeing to a no-deal Brexit''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/27/hammond-plots-with-starmer-to-kill-no-deal-brexit
-
All these folk who said that they were voting for No Deal in 2016 and they knew what it meant...
https://mobile.twitter.com/mikebutcher/status/1155830876963528706
Aye, right...
-
In June 2016 #Brexit voting expats on the Spanish Costa's got €876 for their UK pension. Today it's just €727. How stupid were they?
Similarly a #Brexit voting family who took €2000 spends on holiday in 2016 would have paid £1500, it's now £1950. How stupid were they?
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
Nothing. Only the eu can enforce something happening if uk says no.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
Nothing. Only the eu can enforce something happening if uk says no.
Eh? It'll be a hard border, it has to be.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
Says BS, who clearly knows more about this than professionals who have been working on the consequences for 6-12 months
You know what? I wish we could insulate the grown ups from the effects of No Deal and let you soft lads have it to yourselves. Own it like you deserve to do.
But you won't have to experience it. Because the grown ups will make sure it doesn't happen. And you lot will go on whining about how you've been betrayed, like little kids stopped from drinking bleach by their parents.
-
You sure about that?
-
Glyn. He knows the square root of f**k all about this.
If we leave with No Deal, the Irish border becomes a border between two entirely different, and unco-ordinated economic systems. Of COURSE there will be checks on both sides, otherwise the integrity of both the British economic system and the EU system are compromised. How do you enforce British standards if you have no way of stopping stuff coming in from a market that you have elected to leave?
I've just driven from France into Switzerland. Switzerland is far more integrated into the EU than we would be in the case of No Deal. But we were stopped at the border checkpoint and asked about our journey. Passports shown.
Picture that in Crossmaglen...
-
What do you mean if we leave with no deal? You just said the grown-ups will make sure it doesn't happen! Make your mind up!
-
Go to bed BB. You get stupifyingly boring around this time of night.
-
And you talk contradictory b*llocks.
-
Just go to bed.
-
BST, have you ever thought of entering the PvO tournament? I'm sure you'd find it much easier to get a forecast right, and much less important if you don't. Go on, I challenge you. Who knows, maybe your entry might open the floodgates to some of your disciples.
I won't hold my breath!
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
Says BS, who clearly knows more about this than professionals who have been working on the consequences for 6-12 months
You know what? I wish we could insulate the grown ups from the effects of No Deal and let you soft lads have it to yourselves. Own it like you deserve to do.
But you won't have to experience it. Because the grown ups will make sure it doesn't happen. And you lot will go on whining about how you've been betrayed, like little kids stopped from drinking bleach by their parents.
You got a link to whoever reported that the pm was visibly shaken?
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/cfx8i1/boris_johnson_left_visibly_shaken_after_being/
https://ukmagazine2019.blogspot.com/2019/07/boris-johnson-left-visibly-shaken-after.html
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1152837877539246080
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/boris-johnsons-hard-brexit-challenge/news-story/b5981dd40e68e040042b489a1dd9
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/no-deal-brexit-these-are-the-governments-priority-imports/
http://www.northhertsforeurope.org.uk/no-deal-brexit-what-might-the-consequences-be-july-2019/
He could well have been visibly shaking with laughter at all those that support him.
-
''Leave Ireland alone! US politicians slap Johnson with Brexit warning
IRISH-AMERICAN politicians and business leaders have expressed concern over a hard border being thrown up on the island of Ireland, which would endanger the Good Friday Agreement''
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1159802/brexit-news-irish-americans-good-friday-agreement-hard-border
''Boris Johnson rattles Irish peace, but his arrogance may backfire with Irish reunification''
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/465404-ireland-johnson-brexit-border/
Boris the champion shows the world how to reward voters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOivzoRc0I8
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
Nothing. Only the eu can enforce something happening if uk says no.
Eh? It'll be a hard border, it has to be.
Here's a question - why? Is it not the case that actually a bit of radical thinking could throw up a different suggestion? Norther Ireland don't want it, the rest of the UK doesn't want it, the ROI doesn't want it, so why actually have it? Ah again, the notion of protecting the EU... It only has to be there if people actually want it.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
Nothing. Only the eu can enforce something happening if uk says no.
Eh? It'll be a hard border, it has to be.
Here's a question - why? Is it not the case that actually a bit of radical thinking could throw up a different suggestion? Norther Ireland don't want it, the rest of the UK doesn't want it, the ROI doesn't want it, so why actually have it? Ah again, the notion of protecting the EU... It only has to be there if people actually want it.
I'll jump in BFYP and assume/hope you're referring to the backstop, why? no reason, reunite the two bits of Ireland.
-
BFYP.
But RoI wants to be in the EU, SM and CU. Which WE are currently in.
It is us, the UK that is insisting it is going to leave the EU, SM and CU. It is OUR decision to change the status quo. Therefore, if we want to have a frictionless border with RoI (and by extension, with the whole of the CU) there is an imperative on us to propose a realistic way that this can be implemented.
It's not enough to say "Let's wish the border away." If we were to leave (happy BB?) then the border would exist as a matter of fact. Just as a border does between any two different economic sovereign areas. If you want that border to vanish, you have to find a mechanism to make it vanish.
Norway and Switzerland do that by having systems that are so closely aligned with the EU that there's effectively no difference.
We, the UK, have unilaterally decided that an approach like that is not acceptable to us. (Strictly speaking, a small cabal of Tory MPs has decided that - opinion polls say that a large majority of the population would accept Switzerland/Norway type arrangements, but that's now considered to be a betrayal of Brexit...strange days we live in.)
So, having rejected the grown up solutions, it's up to us to propose a workable alternative.
Johnson just blathers on in hand waving, Latin-quoting style about technological solutions. Which is brilliant, except there aren't any.
The EU suggested a solution which was to keep NI in the CU, which would eliminate the problem with the Irish border. But the Tories and DUP said that was unacceptable to treat NI differently to GB.
So the EU suggested that the whole UK stays in the CU while the magic technological solution is found (the backstop). But the right wing Tories say this is utterly unacceptable.
So...
Well it's a right f**king mess isn't it? And anyone blaming it on the EU either has an agenda or has been asleep for three years.
-
Meanwhile, Johnson was reported to be "visibly shaken" after a briefing by senior civil servants on the consequences of No Deal.
He was told there was a likelihood of civil unrest because of problems in securing basics like life saving drugs and chemicals to ensure we have clean water.
Tell you what. If he's only just found this out, he f**king well wants visibly shaking. He wants f**king shaking till it f**king shakes some bas**rd sense into him.
Absolute fear mongering b*llocks.
What's going to happen at the Irish border when No Deal happens then?
Nothing. Only the eu can enforce something happening if uk says no.
Eh? It'll be a hard border, it has to be.
Here's a question - why? Is it not the case that actually a bit of radical thinking could throw up a different suggestion? Norther Ireland don't want it, the rest of the UK doesn't want it, the ROI doesn't want it, so why actually have it? Ah again, the notion of protecting the EU... It only has to be there if people actually want it.
Why? Those precious WTO rules that hard Brexiteers shout so loudly that they want to have. The island of Ireland will have two separate Customs territories on it, and movements between the two have to be controlled. If not, it's smuggler's paradise in both directions. The EU will definitely protect it's own Custom area and so will the UK, regardless of how many people don't want a hard border.
The Janet And John version is here:
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-what-are-the-options-for-the-irish-border-after-brexit
-
I see the currency guys are cashing in on the dumplings a bit this morning. The market makers have had the best of times skimming off for the last three years.
-
I see the currency guys are cashing in on the dumplings a bit this morning. The market makers have had the best of times skimming off for the last three years.
Buy gal washers while they're cheap and cash them in if tories decide to do what's best for the UK.
-
This from a man that knows the party and it's people inside out.
Give it up for Dominic Cummings tada.
“People think, and by the way I think most people are right: ‘The Tory party is run by people who basically don’t care about people like me.’'
“That is what most people in the country have thought about the Tory party for decades. I know a lot of Tory MPs and I am sad to say the public is basically correct. Tory MPs largely do not care about these poorer people. They don’t care about the NHS. And the public has kind of cottoned on to that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/30/dominic-cummings-tories-do-not-care-about-poor-people-or-the-nhs
-
This from a man that knows the party and it's people inside out.
Give it up for Dominic Cummings tada.
“People think, and by the way I think most people are right: ‘The Tory party is run by people who basically don’t care about people like me.’'
“That is what most people in the country have thought about the Tory party for decades. I know a lot of Tory MPs and I am sad to say the public is basically correct. Tory MPs largely do not care about these poorer people. They don’t care about the NHS. And the public has kind of cottoned on to that.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/30/dominic-cummings-tories-do-not-care-about-poor-people-or-the-nhs
I would disagree on that, if they didn't care they wouldn't have done the living wage increases and lower level tax cuts.
Having said that you can always make these accusations. As a higher level tax payer what will the labour party offer you? Is it not about trying to appease all parts of the spectrum in some form or is that unachievable?
-
BFYP
What Labour had offered ever since the Great Crash, is sensible, textbook economics that would have seen our economy growing significantly faster than it has done, and as a result, the whole cou try being significantly wealthier.
What we've actually had is a decade of the most boneheadedly stupid self-inflicted economic damage.
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
That liar Dominic Raab caught out lying through his lying teeth.
He claims he made it abundantly clear in the Ref campaign that No Deal might happen.
The BBC fact checkers have found no evidence of that actually happening.
As I keep asking the full-on Brexiteers here: ever think you've been had?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49165836
-
Brexit a project of the rich right for the rich right by the right right. Using the support of poorer people in one of the greatest cons of modern times.
E.g. hedge fund mogul Crispin Odley. He's donated £863k to pro-Brexit campaigns & made £220m in 2016 betting against the £. Now he's funding Boris Johnson, getting his say on Brexit. Why aren't the British people? It's time for a #PeoplesVote.
-
Brexit is the finish of the Labour Party, as a power it is very nearly dead.
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
That liar Dominic Raab caught out lying through his lying teeth.
He claims he made it abundantly clear in the Ref campaign that No Deal might happen.
The BBC fact checkers have found no evidence of that actually happening.
As I keep asking the full-on Brexiteers here: ever think you've been had?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49165836
Absolutely not, I voted with the full knowledge that we may leave on wto terms and be able to trade with the rest of the planet
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
That liar Dominic Raab caught out lying through his lying teeth.
He claims he made it abundantly clear in the Ref campaign that No Deal might happen.
The BBC fact checkers have found no evidence of that actually happening.
As I keep asking the full-on Brexiteers here: ever think you've been had?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49165836
Absolutely not, I voted with the full knowledge that we may leave on wto terms and be able to trade with the rest of the planet
We already trade with the rest of the world, we always have. It's the terms on which we do it that's going to change. And not for the better.
-
The price of food and drink will "go through the roof" if the UK leaves the EU without a deal,
a new study suggests.
Sorry to sound selfish, but I don't want my food prices to skyrocket just so that a small handful of extremely wealthy people can avoid paying their taxes. #StopBrexit
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
That liar Dominic Raab caught out lying through his lying teeth.
He claims he made it abundantly clear in the Ref campaign that No Deal might happen.
The BBC fact checkers have found no evidence of that actually happening.
As I keep asking the full-on Brexiteers here: ever think you've been had?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49165836
Absolutely not, I voted with the full knowledge that we may leave on wto terms and be able to trade with the rest of the planet
This is head-banging against the wall stupidity.
As Glyn says, we already trade with the rest of the world. What "leaving on WTO rules" means is that we'd still be able to go on trading with the rest of the world as we do now except for our trade with the EU and our trade with every country in the world that the EU has a trade deal with, all of which will be harder and more expensive.
But hey! We'll have taken back control eh? The control to make decisions to make ourselves poorer and more isolated, so that's all good.
-
The price of food and drink will "go through the roof" if the UK leaves the EU without a deal,
a new study suggests.
Sorry to sound selfish, but I don't want my food prices to skyrocket just so that a small handful of extremely wealthy people can avoid paying their taxes. #StopBrexit
Oh bugger does that mean we'll will have to buy our meat from Australia and New Zealand again? When we went into Europe The price of Lamb Trebbled, something to do with susidizing inept Farmers all over Europe I recall.
-
You may need a bigger bra if you eat a lot of this Sproty.
''Australian meat industry leaders are heavily lobbying their government to put pressure on Britain to accept products currently banned under EU law after Brexit.
Among the meat products suggested for export to the UK are hormone-treated beef and “burnt goat heads”.
Ministers from both countries met last week to discuss the future of their trading relationship, amid concerns that the Australian government could force the UK to lower food standards''
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-meat-banned-eu-australia-beef-liam-fox-dit-friends-of-the-earth-a8475006.html
-
How 'free' are Free Trade Deals.
Excerpts from a new book Privatized Planet: Free Trade as a Weapon Against Democracy, Healthcare and the Environment and interview with it's author Prof Tim Coles
First of all, we should remember that ‘free trade’ is a propaganda term. Often the texts of ‘free trade’ deals consist of articles designed to privilege foreign (mainly US) corporations over domestic ones (‘national treatment’), to privatize public services under the pretext that public ownership is a hindrance to corporate competition, and allow for arbitration, meaning that corporations can sue governments (‘investor-state dispute settlements’).
Not much is ‘free’ in these arrangements. Notice also that my summary says little about trade; such deals are more concerned with investor-rights protections and undermining international labour and health and safety laws.
While FTAs benefit corporations, Coles continued, “the biggest loser is society at large"
these misleadingly-named investor-rights arrangements, negotiated in secret, apparently in violation of international law, profit the CEOs and shareholders of transnational, often US-based, corporations.
The biggest loser is society at large, including workers who risk lower pay and compromised health and safety, governments who have the threat of corporate lawsuits hanging over them, and the environment which suffers from corporate plunder. They also feed far-right narratives: that ‘globalists’ and ‘immigrants’ are ruining our lives.
Brexit is like jumping out of the frying pan of a neoliberal EU into the furnace of ultra-neoliberal ‘free trade’ deals.
The people who understand this, like Nigel Farage (the alleged ‘conservative nationalists’) are skilled at manipulating significant numbers of working-class people who, quite rightly, feel undermined by the EU and its ‘liberal internationalist’ supporters. The hard- and far-right parties do not attack international capitalism, which is the real root-cause of workers’ misery. They and their followers are happy to blame the most vulnerable elements of society, who are themselves also victims of neoliberalism.
https://www.thecanary.co/feature/2019/08/02/academic-warns-of-a-furnace-of-ultra-neoliberal-free-trade-deals-after-brexit/
(anyone who doesn't like The Canary please feel free to ignore all of the above)
-
How 'free' are Free Trade Deals.
Excerpts from a new book Privatized Planet: Free Trade as a Weapon Against Democracy, Healthcare and the Environment and interview with it's author Prof Tim Coles
First of all, we should remember that ‘free trade’ is a propaganda term. Often the texts of ‘free trade’ deals consist of articles designed to privilege foreign (mainly US) corporations over domestic ones (‘national treatment’), to privatize public services under the pretext that public ownership is a hindrance to corporate competition, and allow for arbitration, meaning that corporations can sue governments (‘investor-state dispute settlements’).
Not much is ‘free’ in these arrangements. Notice also that my summary says little about trade; such deals are more concerned with investor-rights protections and undermining international labour and health and safety laws.
While FTAs benefit corporations, Coles continued, “the biggest loser is society at large"
these misleadingly-named investor-rights arrangements, negotiated in secret, apparently in violation of international law, profit the CEOs and shareholders of transnational, often US-based, corporations.
The biggest loser is society at large, including workers who risk lower pay and compromised health and safety, governments who have the threat of corporate lawsuits hanging over them, and the environment which suffers from corporate plunder. They also feed far-right narratives: that ‘globalists’ and ‘immigrants’ are ruining our lives.
Brexit is like jumping out of the frying pan of a neoliberal EU into the furnace of ultra-neoliberal ‘free trade’ deals.
The people who understand this, like Nigel Farage (the alleged ‘conservative nationalists’) are skilled at manipulating significant numbers of working-class people who, quite rightly, feel undermined by the EU and its ‘liberal internationalist’ supporters. The hard- and far-right parties do not attack international capitalism, which is the real root-cause of workers’ misery. They and their followers are happy to blame the most vulnerable elements of society, who are themselves also victims of neoliberalism.
https://www.thecanary.co/feature/2019/08/02/academic-warns-of-a-furnace-of-ultra-neoliberal-free-trade-deals-after-brexit/
(anyone who doesn't like The Canary please feel free to ignore all of the above)
Cheers Wilts please state at top of post that it's from the Canary to save some of us fellow posters time!
-
Well THERE'S a surprise.
That liar Dominic Raab caught out lying through his lying teeth.
He claims he made it abundantly clear in the Ref campaign that No Deal might happen.
The BBC fact checkers have found no evidence of that actually happening.
As I keep asking the full-on Brexiteers here: ever think you've been had?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49165836
Absolutely not, I voted with the full knowledge that we may leave on wto terms and be able to trade with the rest of the planet
This is head-banging against the wall stupidity.
As Glyn says, we already trade with the rest of the world. What "leaving on WTO rules" means is that we'd still be able to go on trading with the rest of the world as we do now except for our trade with the EU and our trade with every country in the world that the EU has a trade deal with, all of which will be harder and more expensive.
But hey! We'll have taken back control eh? The control to make decisions to make ourselves poorer and more isolated, so that's all good.
Aye, it's about sovereignty and immigration for me.
About time you stopped bleeting on about the economy, and have the spine admit it has nothing to do with it for you, its purely your ideology
-
Sovereignty to do what?
-
Screw the economy of course.
-
Read this Telegraph front page.
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1157922054294900736/photo/1
Stop and think what it means.
Boris Johnson's senior adviser is saying that if the UK's ultimate Sovereign body votes to bring down the Govt if it tries to go for No Deal, and a General Election is called because the Govt has collapsed, they will push No Deal through anyway.
This is precisely how democracies collapse folks. Right in front of your eyes. Politicians and their arsehole greasers who think they are above the usual constraints, saying "f**k you" to the processes that hold the country together.
-
It is also not true.
If Parliament votes No Confidence in this government then MP's have 14 days to see if another government could have the confidence of the HoC.
This caretaker government, either led by Corbyn or someone else, could then ask the EU for a further Brexit extension whilst a General Election or 2nd Referendum (or both) is set up.
So by my calculations MP's can stop a No Deal up until 17th October.
-
True Wilts, but putting Corbyn in No10, even in those circumstances and just for a couple of days would mean the end of any Tory MP's career.
I can see the possibility of a Popular Front emerging that puts someone else into No 10. Ken Clarke or Dominic Grieve or Yvette Cooper, say.
But. It needs a lot of very quick movement by a lot of MPs from a lot of different parties.
-
Yes that's the talk Billy, Keir Starmer was another name mentioned. We have mentioned it before, and I am sure we will again, but it seems at the moment that come the Autumn the fate of the country will hinge on the decisions that a dozen Tory MP's make - career or country?
I didn't read the Telegraph article - like you I only saw the headline. Have you read it and does it say what we have said here? Or is now actually printing propaganda as 'news'?
-
I've only read the text that's readable on that image. And of course the Telegraph is the journal of the Tory party, so it's possible it's just repeating Cummings's claims to stiffen the sinews of the True Believers.
Point is though that the senior adviser to the PM is advocating f**king all over the democratic processes that underpin how our country is run. And no-one seems to bat an eyelid.
Strange days indeed.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPIGq_eiRBU
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPIGq_eiRBU
Thanks Glyn this interview with Jonathon Powell one of the most senior and experienced negotiators and diplomats in the world puts paid to the idea that Johnson can breathe any life into Stormont as Powell points out having discussions with and being dependent on the DUP to be in government is not an impartial position making genuine negotiations impossible.
He also points out that Johnson's precondition that the EU must give up the backstop before any negotiations means that johnson will have to back down or there will be no negotiations, that his position of trying to scare the EU into renegotiations will never work as there is no alternative to the backstop and that Ireland would have to revert to the original backstop and be in a CU alone with a border in the Irish sea.
No-deal means hard border, deal means staying in the CU, come on then all you brexit brains watch the video and then give us your answers how will you sort it out?
Or will it be the usual cop-out, I don't open links, I don't do debates unless I'm right, I don't read those newspapers, I don't have an answer so I'll ignore the post.
-
It is a difficult one though isn't it. Do you take a no deal or do you constantly delay and push for a general election which sees numerous Brexit party MP's taking seats?
-
It is a difficult one though isn't it. Do you take a no deal or do you constantly delay and push for a general election which sees numerous Brexit party MP's taking seats?
Almost everything has been tried by the government except genuine cross party negotiations so unless they do and I can't really see boris entertaining that then a general election will be the only outcome which may or may not resolve anything. As has been said by many no-deal is financial and political suicide for all except maybe farage if he could field and win enough seats.
-
It is a difficult one though isn't it. Do you take a no deal or do you constantly delay and push for a general election which sees numerous Brexit party MP's taking seats?
Or the Norway option pushed so hard at the time of the Referendum that would do away with the need for a backstop?
-
Just to throw something else into this.
Did anyone else see the BBC's Beyond 100 Days last week (30 July)?
https://archive.org/details/BBCNEWS_20190730_180000_Beyond_100_Days
The interview at about 7:43 p.m. was with a former US senator who is part of a committee set up to 'Protect the Good Friday Agreement'. The gist was that there are so many 'Irish' Americans worried about a hard border, including members of the 'Ways and Means Committee'. This committee will be required to accept any trade deal the UK makes with the US, and it is likely (according to the interviewee at least) to block any such deal in the event of a no deal Brexit and a hard border.
Very scary to hear such things from the basket we look to be putting all our eggs in.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPIGq_eiRBU
This 6 minute interview is spot on. Everyone should watch it, especially anyone who might actually be negotiating with the EU and Ireland.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPIGq_eiRBU
This 6 minute interview is spot on. Everyone should watch it, especially anyone who might actually be negotiating with the EU and Ireland.
If only we had a government run by people who listen to logic and reason...
-
A scenario plan of the possibles before Oct 31;
http://www.democraticaudit.com/2019/08/05/is-it-too-late-to-stop-a-no-deal-brexit/
Cummings seems set on making the default stick.....wait and see on whether the rebel Tories have enough backbone to risk their careers and noses in the trough.
What to do about the likes of Mann and Flint is the Labour dilemma?
-
Headline: Wine prices could be slashed in UK in a year if Boris Johnson strikes bold post-Brexit trade deal with Australia.
Reality: Currently the tariffs on wines imported from Australia and New Zealand into the UK work out at around 10-12p added to a bottle of still wine and 22p on sparkling wine and hopes a trade deal can be struck quickly-like all the others the UK has signed recently?
The political pygmies are still at it, George Brandis praising a known liar and racist.
''In an interview with Politico he said he was a "unashamed fan" of Boris and was hugely positive about signing a quick trade deal with Britain, too.
"My advice to the U.K. government is to be bold and not be afraid of free trade agreements," he said.
He hopes such a deal can be reached "before the end of 2020" or even earlier, pointing to the speed at which they've done similar deals before.
"It only took 15 months for Australia to complete our very very ambitious FTA that is with the U.S. some 15 years ago.
"The political will to do it is there.”
Be patient with this video you could learn a lot about metadata from the great man.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=George+Brandis+Metadata
-
Headline: Wine prices could be slashed in UK in a year if Boris Johnson strikes bold post-Brexit trade deal with Australia.
Reality: Currently the tariffs on wines imported from Australia and New Zealand into the UK work out at around 10-12p added to a bottle of still wine and 22p on sparkling wine and hopes a trade deal can be struck quickly-like all the others the UK has signed recently?
The political pygmies are still at it, George Brandis praising a known liar and racist.
''In an interview with Politico he said he was a "unashamed fan" of Boris and was hugely positive about signing a quick trade deal with Britain, too.
"My advice to the U.K. government is to be bold and not be afraid of free trade agreements," he said.
He hopes such a deal can be reached "before the end of 2020" or even earlier, pointing to the speed at which they've done similar deals before.
"It only took 15 months for Australia to complete our very very ambitious FTA that is with the U.S. some 15 years ago.
"The political will to do it is there.”
Be patient with this video you could learn a lot about metadata from the great man.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=George+Brandis+Metadata
How's Boris going to slash the Excise Duty on wine from Australia then? That's much, much more than 10p a bottle. Sheesh.
-
With no-deal or a poor deal Glyn VAT will be the concern for most as it could easily go up 50% or more to cover the losses from trade overall?
-
With no-deal or a poor deal Glyn VAT will be the concern for most as it could easily go up 50% or more to cover the losses from trade overall?
VAT is an EU tax that's mandatory for all member states. It could be replaced with something else after Brexit.
-
It's very, very unlikely that a Tory Govt would replace VAT. Thatcher, Major and Cameron all increased it.
It's the tax of choice for right-wingers because it is disproportionately paid by poorer people, whereas income and inheritance tax are disproportionately paid by rich people.
-
Wasn't the introduction of VAT a condition of the UK joining the EEC in 1973?
-
Aye. At 10%. And it basically replaced a Purchase Tax we'd had since the War.
I'm not against a sales tax per se. Pretty much every developed economy has one. It helps control consumption.
But in the UK,it was introduced at 10% by Heath. Reduced to 8% under Wilson. Increased to 15% by Thatcher and 17.5% by Major, reduced to 15% under Brown and increased to 20% under Cameron.
Draw your own conclusions.
-
10%
-
Yes, I've corrected it.
-
I see this little shite is stirring the pot.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49251257
What, precisely, are the EU supposed to negotiate with us that they haven't spent the past 30 months negotiating?
This is the plan though. Have no f**king plan whatsoever for negotiations, blame the EU for not negotiating, then call an election and assume there'll be enough Pavlov Dog anti-EU votes to get them in.
-
The EU has a minimum VAT rate of 15% for its member countries, so Jezza's generosity wouldn't be allowed to compare to that of Heath or Wilson even if he got into power.
-
"We hold all the cards"
"We hold all the card"
"We old are the card"
"We ol dare the card"
"We o dare the cad”
"We odare thu cad"
"We dare thucad"
"We are thuckad"
"We are thucked"
"We are f**ked”
Shamelessly stolen from this bloke https://twitter.com/davidschneider/status/1158781096684871680
-
If johnson drags the UK into no-deal he's more likely to be associated with Lord Haw-Haw than Churchill wouldn't you think?
-
Hi guys just thumbing my way through a few newspapers looking for some good news on brexit ..... dum de dum ......... or on boris ..... de dah ................ or about the economy ...............dum de dah ........... or about trade deals ........... di dum ........... um. I know what about ............ oh that's right Grayling is no longer flushing public money down the bog.
-
Just been surfing through a few sites looking for some good news on vegetarianism.......Mcdonalds, Burgerking, KFC, Greggs... dum de dah......
-
Anyone out there in forum land that can show me some good news about Brexit from anywhere at all?
-
Just been on the Mcdonalds, Burgerking, KFC and Greggs sites and there's still food on their shelves.
-
Read all about it, good news about brexit, officials say that those that can still afford food will be able to eat.
-
Aye. At 10%. And it basically replaced a Purchase Tax we'd had since the War.
I'm not against a sales tax per se. Pretty much every developed economy has one. It helps control consumption.
But in the UK,it was introduced at 10% by Heath. Reduced to 8% under Wilson. Increased to 15% by Thatcher and 17.5% by Major, reduced to 15% under Brown and increased to 20% under Cameron.
Draw your own conclusions.
VAT rates across Europe. If you want to get below 15% there is only one way to go ;)
https://taxfoundation.org/vat-rates-europe-2019/
Slightly mischevious point though, I don't think it needs to be any lower than it is?
-
My original point of posting about VAT rates was that the loss of trade income or in fact the increased cost of processing both imports and exports will have to come from somewhere if we are to maintain the low quality of services. There are a few alternatives raise the VAT, raise income tax or use it as an excuse to further dismantle the welfare state.
-
Isn't VAT a fairer tax than income tax? At least it means individuals who CHOOSE to spend the most on purchases pay the most VAT.
-
I see this little shite is stirring the pot.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49251257
What, precisely, are the EU supposed to negotiate with us that they haven't spent the past 30 months negotiating?
This is the plan though. Have no f**king plan whatsoever for negotiations, blame the EU for not negotiating, then call an election and assume there'll be enough Pavlov Dog anti-EU votes to get them in.
Cue Brexiters being angry the EU won't negotiate while also claiming they always voted for no deal anyway.
-
Aaaaaannnnnnnddddddd the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and rou....!
1) Brexiters voted to leave with no deal.
2) Any deal after should have no bearing on the result.
-
BB,
As I recall, "No deal" was not an option on the Ref vote.
The rhetoric at the time was that it would be easy to agree a better deal than that we had as EU members.
This was clearly not true.
So any deal (or lack of one), is crucial to the next stage of implementation, if you think the non binding Ref should be respected despite the significant change in context since 2016.
But you knew all that, didn't you?
-
Isn't VAT a fairer tax than income tax? At least it means individuals who CHOOSE to spend the most on purchases pay the most VAT.
Fair in that concept, but also means it's a higher proportion of a lower earner's outgoings than it is for a high earners in some cases - though you could argue that higher earners will see more of their purchases VAT applicable where a higher portion of lower earners' purchases are exempt or lower rate. I don't think income tax is necessarily unfair as taxes go at it's current levels either, there has to be a point the richer pay more, where that point is though is debatable.
-
Aaaaaannnnnnnddddddd the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and rou....!
1) Brexiters voted to leave with no deal.
2) Any deal after should have no bearing on the result.
If that's true, why wasn't a rabid defender of democracy such as you claim to be jumping up and down throughout the whole of the two years of deal negotiations denouncing them as being not what people voted for and antidemocratic in the same way that you've protested that a second referendum supposedly is?
-
1) They didn't - there are several people on this very thread who've said they didn't, none of the polling shows they did, and internet search data shows most people weren't even considering it until years after the referendum.
2)This is nonsense and doesn't apply in any walk of life.
-
But now it looks like brexiters would happily subvert the will of the people and parliament to get something they never thought about on the first place. Freedom and sovereignty r us.
-
Regarding 2)
Do you think it would be reasonable if we came to a deal that said every first born British child should be shipped off to Brussels to be sacrificed in exchange for us getting a trade deal?
If you answer "No" then you've accepted the principle that the content of a deal has a bearing on how you view the 2016 Referendum result.
-
Regarding VAT, here's the data from the Office of National Statistics.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2017#indirect-taxes-increase-inequality-of-income
Have a look in particular at Figure 5 and the text below it which says "although richer households pay more in indirect taxes than poorer ones in total, they pay less as a proportion of their income. The poorest fifth of households paid almost 30% of their disposable income in indirect tax – with VAT (12.8%) being the biggest component – compared with 14.6% of disposable income for the richest fifth of households. This means that indirect taxes increase inequality of income.
The graph shows categorically, that, as a proportion of income, the poorest pay far more than the wealthiest on VAT and other indirect taxes, and also benefit far more from Govt spending on state education and the NHS.
Now. Stop and think.
In 2010, the first thing the Tories did was to increase VAT by a third. And they have also significantly cut the amount of our national income we spend on state education, and the NHS. Farage has a career of saying that he wants to decrease income tax (a tax which actually makes poorer people better off, because they pay little of it, but it pays for a good chunk of the NHS, pensions and education) and he wants us to move away from the Govt paying for the NHS through taxes.
Again. Draw your own conclusions.
-
Albie. As far as I'm aware there was no talk of any deal that would mean us remaining in the EU prior to the vote, should we vote to leave. We had a vote and voted to leave. Since then, the EU has jumped on the bandwagon of support from some of our politicians who have betrayed our democratic vote to leave. This would not have been possible had they not received public support of their betrayal.
-
BB
How, precisely, has the EU jumped on a bandwagon of betraying our democratic vote to leave?
-
BB,
You are confusing the issue.
It is not a matter of whether there was a possibility of remaining in the EU. That is a complete red herring, and not relevant.
It is about whether people voted to leave in ALL circumstances, or whether they supported leave to deliver an improved offer.
Now I suspect most would have said that the reason they supported leave was to achieve a better deal for the future.
No deal is NOT a better deal by any measure. It is not anything, other than the loss of present trading arrangements.
I sometimes think some folk imagine a no deal exit on October 31 is the end of the story.
It is not, it is just the beginning of many years of negotiating new trading relationships.
This at the same time as dealing with new tariff barriers that will limit the functioning of the economy, and place the UK lower down the bidding rank compared to EU countries.
Look what is now happening to UK vehicle manufacturing as a case in point!
-
Albie. As far as I'm aware there was no talk of any deal that would mean us remaining in the EU prior to the vote, should we vote to leave. We had a vote and voted to leave. Since then, the EU has jumped on the bandwagon of support from some of our politicians who have betrayed our democratic vote to leave. This would not have been possible had they not received public support of their betrayal.
Sorry BB but I am bit confused here. Which you would no doubt (correctly) say wasn't too hard but - Who has betrayed the democratic vote to leave:
a) The Tory MP's who voted for May's deal to leave the EU
b) the ERG MP's who voted against May's deal to leave the EU
-
Regarding VAT, here's the data from the Office of National Statistics.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2017#indirect-taxes-increase-inequality-of-income
Have a look in particular at Figure 5 and the text below it which says "although richer households pay more in indirect taxes than poorer ones in total, they pay less as a proportion of their income. The poorest fifth of households paid almost 30% of their disposable income in indirect tax – with VAT (12.8%) being the biggest component – compared with 14.6% of disposable income for the richest fifth of households. This means that indirect taxes increase inequality of income.
The graph shows categorically, that, as a proportion of income, the poorest pay far more than the wealthiest on VAT and other indirect taxes, and also benefit far more from Govt spending on state education and the NHS.
Now. Stop and think.
In 2010, the first thing the Tories did was to increase VAT by a third. And they have also significantly cut the amount of our national income we spend on state education, and the NHS. Farage has a career of saying that he wants to decrease income tax (a tax which actually makes poorer people better off, because they pay little of it, but it pays for a good chunk of the NHS, pensions and education) and he wants us to move away from the Govt paying for the NHS through taxes.
Again. Draw your own conclusions.
BST of course that is heavily swayed by the fact higher earners lose over half of their earnings to income tax, NI etc before they even get it, so they can't possibly pay more of a proportion in VAT etc, it's not VAT that causes that but income taxes? Not to mention that higher earners will pay more on mortgages and invest/save more which doesn't take a tax rate - thus it isn't something that can necessarily be avoided unless you propose taxing higher earners even more than they already are? A classic example of how the statistics sway the reality a bit there!
Farage's policies on that are bonkers, hence why playing in to the Brexit party's hands on Brexit is a daft move from Labour, Lib Dems etc.
-
Regarding 2)
"Do you think it would be reasonable if we came to a deal that said every first born British child should be shipped off to Brussels to be sacrificed in exchange for us getting a trade deal?"
Do you think it would be reasonable? Do you think the EU would think it reasonable? I think it would be an offer to end all further offers and the UK should tell them to f**k off and go it alone. NO DEAL!
......Mind you, that would mean us losing out financially wouldn't it..........Let's say they can have the kids as long as they're sacrificed humanely!
"If you answer "No" then you've accepted the principle that the content of a deal has a bearing on how you view the 2016 Referendum result."
referendum RESULT! are you finally, finally, finally admitting that the outcome, end, conclusion of the referendum was a RESULT?
-
Albie. As far as I'm aware there was no talk of any deal that would mean us remaining in the EU prior to the vote, should we vote to leave. We had a vote and voted to leave. Since then, the EU has jumped on the bandwagon of support from some of our politicians who have betrayed our democratic vote to leave. This would not have been possible had they not received public support of their betrayal.
Sorry BB but I am bit confused here. Which you would no doubt (correctly) say wasn't too hard but - Who has betrayed the democratic vote to leave:
a) The Tory MP's who voted for May's deal to leave the EU
b) the ERG MP's who voted against May's deal to leave the EU
That's not too hard, Wilts.Sorry, beat me to it. The ERG voted against May's deal because they didn't consider it to be actually 'leaving' in the sense that the vote supported leaving. Those who supported May's vote obviously thought that it was. Either way, the vote shouldn't have been about whether we left or not. We'd already voted to do so.
-
BFYP.
That graph was dealing with costs and benefits as a proportion of DISPOSABLE income. So the fact that richer people pay more in income tax and mortgages is irrelevant, because we're talking about the effect of indirect taxes on the money that you have left AFTER paying Income Tax and housing costs.
Nobody's trying to spin stats here. It's entirely indisputable that indirect taxes like VAT are regressive (i.e. they hit the poorest hardest). And direct taxes like Income Tax are progressive (they hit the richest hardest).
It's also a matter of factual record that no Tory Govt has ever reduced VAT, and no Tory Govt in my lifetime has ever increased Income Tax.
Like I say, draw your own conclusions.
-
Go on then BB. When you say that May's deal wasn't "leaving in the sense that the vote supported leaving", how does that square with May's deal being a far cleaner break with the EU than the arrangements that Switzerland and Norway have, and Switzerland and Norway being flagged up time after time in 2016 by Leave as examples for us to follow.
Or. If you have trouble with that question, how do YOU know what sort of Brexit Leavers voted for in 2016.
-
I was answering Wilts question of why the Erg voted against May's deal, not why I did. I never voted.
I was under the impression that most people would have heard what this bloke said.
https://youtu.be/gUsKWsPcRXE
-
Albie. As far as I'm aware there was no talk of any deal that would mean us remaining in the EU prior to the vote, should we vote to leave. We had a vote and voted to leave. Since then, the EU has jumped on the bandwagon of support from some of our politicians who have betrayed our democratic vote to leave. This would not have been possible had they not received public support of their betrayal.
Sorry BB but I am bit confused here. Which you would no doubt (correctly) say wasn't too hard but - Who has betrayed the democratic vote to leave:
a) The Tory MP's who voted for May's deal to leave the EU
b) the ERG MP's who voted against May's deal to leave the EU
That's not too hard, Wilts.Sorry, beat me to it. The ERG voted against May's deal because they didn't consider it to be actually 'leaving' in the sense that the vote supported leaving. Those who supported May's vote obviously thought that it was. Either way, the vote shouldn't have been about whether we left or not. We'd already voted to do so.
So:
The MP's who voted against leaving the EU honored the vote to Leave whilst the ones who voted to leave have betrayed it
thanks for clarifying BB
-
No Wilts, Those who voted against it didn't consider it to be leaving in the way intended. That doesn't mean they want to betray the democratic vote to leave.
-
So go on then BB. The list of questions you're avoiding is building up and I know you set great weight on the importance of answering questions. Do YOU think that May's deal would have resulted in us leaving in the way that the people who voted Leave in 2016 intended?
-
No, I don't.
Now then owd lad, seeing as your such a stickler for answering questions, go back to the start of this thread and the other political threads and answer all my questions that you've 'missed'. I'm not so demanding that you have to answer all of them at once, just one at a time will suffice.
-
Go on. You list them for me. I'm happy enough to list the ones that you ignore.
The latest one was asking you how exactly the EU had jumped on a bandwagon of betraying our democratic vote to leave?
-
OK, when I've got time I'll put them on, sporadically like, when I've got nowt better to do.
-
I won't hold my breath. For either a sensible list from you, or answers to support the guff you write in here.
-
BST's unanswered questions. Number 1:
Don't you want any sort of control on immigration?
-
Well you really are determined to make a tit of yourself aren't you?
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg868041#msg868041
I'd have thought my take was bleeding obvious from that answer, but since you have spent the past 6 months in this mode where you insist on everything being spelled out for you (and then ignore it anyway) I'll spell it out for you.
My opinion is that the benefits that we get from free movement of people far outweighs the problems. But then I would think that, since I'm from an immigrant family and my kids' maternal grandfather came to England from Italy.
I don't see immigrants as a threat. I understand that others do, and I guess that's where the main fault line in the country is now.
-
Is that supposed to be an answer?
-
What part of "EU free movement of people is not an issue you can consider in isolation: you have to judge it in the light of the overall economic benefits and my take is that free movement is worth it because of the economic benefits we get, while in addition, I have very personal reasons for welcoming immigration" are you struggling to understand today?
-
First question = First failure to answer.
-
I think we need a whip round to buy you a cat to kick. And a copy of Self Esteem for Dummies.
-
It's a simple enough question. Don't you want any sort of control on immigration?
-
From the EU no because we get benefits that outweigh perceived problems.
From the wider world yes, because the situation is different and we don't get those benefits.
-
I'm sure there are very few people who don't welcome genuine, hard-working, useful, law-abiding immigrants from anywhere in the world who will be of benefit to the country. Of course for this to be implemented there has to be immigration control, otherwise, we end up getting the deadwood from other countries that are only too pleased to see the back of them.
Don't you think that would massively reduce the current immigration problems and in fact reduce racism?
-
Whoa.
There's a whole list for you to answer now.
Starting with the question I asked you earlier.
-
Don't you think that immigration controls would massively reduce the current immigration problems and in fact reduce racism?
-
Go on. You list them for me. I'm happy enough to list the ones that you ignore.
The latest one was asking you how exactly the EU had jumped on a bandwagon of betraying our democratic vote to leave?
Because it was far easier for the EU to pacify half of the country than all of it.
-
No I don't believe that abrogating the agreement on free movement of people would reduce racism. Because it will also mean us having severely worse economic performance over the short and long term. One of the key drivers of racism is NOT how many people from different countries there are in your area. It's how you, personally, are doing economically. That's been the case throughout history. People get f**ked off by working harder and not getting on, and mendacious bas**rds tell them it is the fault of that f**king foreigner over there. So, if we choose an immigration policy that makes us significantly poorer, that will not reduce racism.
Now, onto your answer. I asked you to explain HOW the EU had jumped on a bandwagon. Not your opinion of WHY they did.
I'll make it simpler because you're struggling. What exactly did the EU do, to stymie our Brexit?
-
How on earth would refusing entry to unsuitable immigrants be detrimental to our economy?
-
Because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market. Every person in the EU has the right to move to other EU countries to work and set up residence. Abrogating that right automatically puts you outside the SM and would badly damage our economy.
We CAN refuse entry to people who are legally undesirable or are moving with no intention of working.
By the way, both Norway and Switzerland buy into free movement rules because of the economic advantages that accrue from the resultant tie ins with the EU economy.
-
"What exactly did the EU do, to stymie our Brexit?"
They didn't have to do much at all, about half of our nation did that for them, and probably they thought more than half if they listened to the BBC's propaganda. It certainly wouldn't have made them feel the need to give more in negotiations.
-
Because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market. Every person in the EU has the right to move to other EU countries to work and set up residence. Abrogating that right automatically puts you outside the SM and would badly damage our economy.
We CAN refuse entry to people who are legally undesirable or are moving with no intention of working.
By the way, both Norway and Switzerland buy into free movement rules because of the economic advantages that accrue from the resultant tie ins with the EU economy.
But when we voted to leave the EU we voted to leave the single market.
-
Because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market. Every person in the EU has the right to move to other EU countries to work and set up residence. Abrogating that right automatically puts you outside the SM and would badly damage our economy.
We CAN refuse entry to people who are legally undesirable or are moving with no intention of working.
By the way, both Norway and Switzerland buy into free movement rules because of the economic advantages that accrue from the resultant tie ins with the EU economy.
But when we voted to leave the EU we voted to leave the single market.
If that's your end point, why the f**k did you ask me that question in the first place?
It's almost as if you're not really interested in discussing things like a grown up and just prefer dicking about.
-
"What exactly did the EU do, to stymie our Brexit?"
They didn't have to do much at all, about half of our nation did that for them, and probably they thought more than half if they listened to the BBC's propaganda. It certainly wouldn't have made them feel the need to give more in negotiations.
So when you said "the EU has jumped on the bandwagon of support from some of our politicians who have betrayed our democratic vote to leave" you didn't really mean that the EU had done much at all on any practical effect? Is that right?
-
Like I said owd lad, they only had to jump on the bandwagon, and join forces with the undemocratic politicians and their supporters.
-
No Wilts, Those who voted against it didn't consider it to be leaving in the way intended. That doesn't mean they want to betray the democratic vote to leave.
Sorry, again thanks for correcting me BB.
So the Labour and Lib Dem MP's who voted with the ERG against May's deal because they didn't think it was what people had voted for in the referendum are upholding the democratic vote. Whilst the people who voted for May's deal to leave have betrayed it.
Got it now. So our new PM and most of his cabinet, Rees-Mogg, Javid, Rabb, Patel are all betrayers. Who knew.
-
Like I said owd lad, they only had to jump on the bandwagon, and join forces with the undemocratic politicians and their supporters.
Ok. So you accept that the EU has not done anything practically to stop Brexit. That's good. We're getting somewhere. Finally.
-
Because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market. Every person in the EU has the right to move to other EU countries to work and set up residence. Abrogating that right automatically puts you outside the SM and would badly damage our economy.
We CAN refuse entry to people who are legally undesirable or are moving with no intention of working.
By the way, both Norway and Switzerland buy into free movement rules because of the economic advantages that accrue from the resultant tie ins with the EU economy.
But when we voted to leave the EU we voted to leave the single market.
If that's your end point, why the f**k did you ask me that question in the first place?
It's almost as if you're not really interested in discussing things like a grown up and just prefer dicking about.
What I meant to add was it was because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market why we voted to leave.
-
No Wilts, Those who voted against it didn't consider it to be leaving in the way intended. That doesn't mean they want to betray the democratic vote to leave.
Sorry, again thanks for correcting me BB.
You're welcome.
-
Like I said owd lad, they only had to jump on the bandwagon, and join forces with the undemocratic politicians and their supporters.
Ok. So you accept that the EU has not done anything practically to stop Brexit. That's good. We're getting somewhere. Finally.
How can they stop Brexit? We voted to leave! They might have tried a bit harder to strike a better deal for both parties if they were up against a country that didn't appear to have half of its population on their side.
-
Because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market. Every person in the EU has the right to move to other EU countries to work and set up residence. Abrogating that right automatically puts you outside the SM and would badly damage our economy.
We CAN refuse entry to people who are legally undesirable or are moving with no intention of working.
By the way, both Norway and Switzerland buy into free movement rules because of the economic advantages that accrue from the resultant tie ins with the EU economy.
But when we voted to leave the EU we voted to leave the single market.
If that's your end point, why the f**k did you ask me that question in the first place?
It's almost as if you're not really interested in discussing things like a grown up and just prefer dicking about.
What I meant to add was it was because free movement of workers is integral to being in the Single Market why we voted to leave.
Yes, I appreciate that. And I've said throughout the past 3 years that a big part of that was due to calculated deception of voters by Farage. He consistently put Norway forward as an example of what sort of relationship with the EU we could aspire to have outside the EU, whilst never once saying that Norway was part of the free movement agreement.
In simple terms, Leave voters were deceived into believing that we could opt out of all the bits they didn't like (like free movement, paying into the EU, accepting EU market regulations) and keep all the bits we did like (like trade with the EU on terms as advantageous as at present).
They weren't making a balanced decision between what we would gain and what we would lose.
-
Right. Ok.
So. I'll ask for the ninth or tenth time.
What specific things do you think we would have got from a deal with the EU if we'd all shown a bit more of the Dunkirk Spirit.
Simple enough question and I KNOW that you've thought about it a lot because you raise this issue once a fortnight.
So tell us. What specific things should we have got from the EU?
-
I don't know specifically what we should have achieved if we'd been united. Unlike you, I'm one of those Remain voters who can't read the future, but it almost certainly didn't help matters being split down the middle. Perhaps the EU, on seeing the public split along with the BBC bias might be hoping for a second referendum, and on that basis are unwilling to offer anything better than the deal already offered.
-
So once again we get a null answer to a straightforward question.
BB, like pretty much everyone who supports Leave, has no idea why they dislike the EU's approach to the Brexit negotiations. But they just do.
And it's all the fault of the Remainers.
I know this seems like one of those f**king daft nightmares that you will wake up from at any moment, but it's here, now and defining the country our kids will grow up in. Grand, int it?
-
Yes BST, it is very much the fault of the Remainers in my opinion. It's the Remainers approach to the Brexit negotiations that I dislike so much, and I know I'm not alone.
-
So you've no idea why the negotiations were shit and you've no idea what more we should have got from them, but you know it's Remainers to blame?
And like Trump often claims: A lot of people are saying this.
Does that sum up tonight's excursion?
-
You said they were shit, not me! I say they failed because they didn't get the votes needed to succeed. The problem is, Remainers wouldn't have agreed to them no matter how good they were, and even pretend Remainers like Corbyn wouldn't have agreed to them either. Remainers all over the country from the very top right down to third division off-topic football forums would have all rejected the negotiations.
-
It doesn't matter if you don't know what you want why are you crying about it?
-
Is that a question for Billy or me?
-
Is that a question for Billy or me?
I wouldn't under any circumstance think that BST didn't know what he wanted.
-
Ah, you mean a second referendum. A typical example of a bloke who knows what he wants and is crying about it.
I see what you mean.
-
BB
The Parliamentary arithmetic is simple.
If the right wing of the Tory party, which campaigned most vigorously for Brexit, had voted for May's deal, we'd have already left the EU.
You've been given lots of chances to criticise the right wing of the Tory party and you've ducked every one. You've instead chosen to blame Remainers for us not leaving the EU yet.
So I'll ask you a really,really simple couple of questions. What is it that the right wing of the Tory party didn't like about May's deal? And why is it the fault of Remainers that the EU weren't able to give us a deal that would have satisfied the right wing of the Tory party?
-
Ah, you mean a second referendum. A typical example of a bloke who knows what he wants and is crying about it.
I see what you mean.
So you just ignore the numerous times I've said I'd take a Norway-type deal?
I don't know what you get out of this, but I truly hope it's worth it.
-
The Tory right-wing rejected the deal because of the backstop agreement. They wanted to leave but didn't think the deal was right. The Remainers, on the other hand, wanted to reject everything in order to have a second referendum.
-
Ah, you mean a second referendum. A typical example of a bloke who knows what he wants and is crying about it.
I see what you mean.
So you just ignore the numerous times I've said I'd take a Norway-type deal?
I don't know what you get out of this, but I truly hope it's worth it.
Isn't it funny how you didn't agree with Farage at the time he suggested a Norway type agreement!
-
The Tory right-wing rejected the deal because of the backstop agreement. They wanted to leave but didn't think the deal was right. The Remainers, on the other hand, wanted to reject everything in order to have a second referendum.
No, no, no. That doesn't work.
I asked what the EU should have done to make the deal acceptable to the right wing of the Tory party.
We've been through this many times. The Tory party under May took the decision to own the Brexit negotiations. THEY decided to put party politics above the wonderful coalition of national unity that you desire. They entirely excluded everyone else from having any input whatsoever in the negotiations.
And then they came up with a deal that the right wing of the Tory party rejected.
So I'll ask you again.
What deal should the EU have offered that would have been acceptable to the right wing of the Tory party.
-
Ah, you mean a second referendum. A typical example of a bloke who knows what he wants and is crying about it.
I see what you mean.
So you just ignore the numerous times I've said I'd take a Norway-type deal?
I don't know what you get out of this, but I truly hope it's worth it.
Isn't it funny how you didn't agree with Farage at the time he suggested a Norway type agreement!
No BB. Come on. You're better than this.
We talked about this a few weeks ago. I never believed Farage was serious about a Norway deal. He was bullshitting the gullible. So of course I didn't agree with him...
....and anyway, in 2016 I wouldn't have agreed with him anyway would I? Because I think a Norway deal would be much worse than Remaining. So of course I wouldn't have wanted a Norway deal before the Referendum. I wanted us to Remain.
By late 2016, I'd have accepted a Norway deal as the least bad outcome of Brexit. But Farage was already moving on to a Norway deal being a betrayal by then (who'd have thought he'd do that eh? Shock! Horror!) And by late 2016, May was interpreting Brexit as meaning so ethi g far more detached than Norway's arrangement. And refusing to discuss that decision with anyone. So Norway's not been in the table since late 2016. Not because of Remainers' decisions. Because the Tory party and those to the right of them decided it wasn't acceptable.
Like I say. We went through this a couple or three weeks back. You seem to be struggling with your memory. Maybe you should take a moment to read what I think rather than thi k what you want me to think? It'd save both of us a lot of time and effort.
-
Well, Billy boy, not being a right-wing Tory member I don't know! Perhaps you're a closet right-wing Tory member and you know? All I know is what I've already told you owd lad.
What do you think would have been acceptable to the right-wing of the Tory party?
-
BB
I've said it consistently for 3 years.
NOTHING would have been acceptable to the right wing of the Tory party.
Because this was never about Brexit. It was about who controls the Tory party.
They've won that battle. And they've used their useful idiots with their passions about the EU and the sanctity of the democratic process to do the job for them.
Congratulations. You've done your job.
-
And what job have I done! Sorry, but I really have to laugh sometimes!!
-
You've done the job better than me. You've made the Remain vote a choice of the obnoxious!
-
"You" plural.
The millions of you who have naively bought into this idea that you were standing up for democracy, by falling into line with the Hard Brexiters. Those of you who thought (bless) that you were upholding a principle, when what you were really doing was putting the shits up the Tory party that if they didn't take us into a hard Brexit, they'd be turfed out so they'd better pass the reins onto Boris and the nutter wing of the party.
That's what the whole issue has been about all along.
-
All that's far too clever for me owd lad! Maybe the Russians have invaded the Viking site and took over the brain cells of all the members that actually possess some. bas**rds! They dint get me though!!
I rate like Boris me!!!
-
BB/BST,
Get yourselves a room, Lads!
The homo erotic tension of your jousting might be too much for the weak minded.
In fact, we could have a whip round on here, for you both to go off and consummate,
a game of "Bite the Bentley Bullet with a quick Blubbery Stubbery" .
It might let us all get back to the matter in hand!
-
I think I have whiplash from the spin!
John McDonnell's threat to embroil Queen if PM defies confidence vote branded a 'coup'
''The shadow chancellor suggested he would send Jeremy Corbyn to Buckingham Palace “in a cab” to tell the 93-year-old monarch the party was ready to assume power, in the latest sign that MPs seeking to stop a no-deal Brexit are planning to embroil Her Majesty in politics as they run out of parliamentary options''
About time the old girl got off her backside and actually did something.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/07/john-mcdonnell-threatens-march-palace-tell-queen-taking-boris1/
-
Australia sending its best to support brexit.
Tony Abbott used to promote pro-Brexit group despite having 'no affiliation'
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/aug/08/tony-abbott-used-to-promote-pro-brexit-group-despite-having-no-affiliation
Watch the video below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wT9XS_TvzQ
-
I still believe that the UK COULD be better off outside of the EU. However, it absolutely sickens me to the core that this issue has become hijacked by the Tory right. When I voted to leave in 2016 never for one moment did I believe that it would eventually lead to BJ becoming PM and his lunatic pals getting their hands on power. When I voted to leave I expected a sensible withdrawal where we would maintain close economic ties with the EU whilst withdrawing from the political influence it has. Unfortunately it's turned into a bloodbath. Who's at fault? As with most things, blame doesn't lay with one side. Remain supporting MP's would have voted down any agreement that the PM had come back with. Indeed, very soon after the referendum I heard an MP on the radio state, categorically, that they would use Parliament to stop Brexit. Full stop. On the other end of the scale, the hard Brexit MPs didn't want any agreement. They want a complete withdrawal from the EU with no compromise whatsoever and they're also savvy enough to use this to get power in the Tory party which, as BST correctly points out, is the real reason behind all of this.
-
I still believe that the UK COULD be better off outside of the EU. However, it absolutely sickens me to the core that this issue has become hijacked by the Tory right. When I voted to leave in 2016 never for one moment did I believe that it would eventually lead to BJ becoming PM and his lunatic pals getting their hands on power. When I voted to leave I expected a sensible withdrawal where we would maintain close economic ties with the EU whilst withdrawing from the political influence it has. Unfortunately it's turned into a bloodbath. Who's at fault? As with most things, blame doesn't lay with one side. Remain supporting MP's would have voted down any agreement that the PM had come back with. Indeed, very soon after the referendum I heard an MP on the radio state, categorically, that they would use Parliament to stop Brexit. Full stop. On the other end of the scale, the hard Brexit MPs didn't want any agreement. They want a complete withdrawal from the EU with no compromise whatsoever and they're also savvy enough to use this to get power in the Tory party which, as BST correctly points out, is the real reason behind all of this.
I voted leave, and those feelings are echoed by me, given a 2nd referendum I would vote to stay on the basis that I am now informed on the outcome of leaving, in 2016 nothingwas made clear at all
-
We All know more now than we did back in 2016. The annoying thing is Remainers deny that. Remainers claim to have known how everything would pan out from the start. That's why they insist on trying to control the minds of anyone who dares show any positivity about leaving the EU by calling them thick, stupid, childish berks and the likes of. And that's not all. Their negativity and sheer determination for Brexit to fail has directed the course of events, leading to low confidence in investments while also providing the EU with more ammunition to treat us like shit.
-
Everyone knows more than we did three years ago the problem for Remainers is getting the Anti-UK leavers is for them to explain what all the advantages are or even to explain what they want.
-
BFYP.
That graph was dealing with costs and benefits as a proportion of DISPOSABLE income. So the fact that richer people pay more in income tax and mortgages is irrelevant, because we're talking about the effect of indirect taxes on the money that you have left AFTER paying Income Tax and housing costs.
Nobody's trying to spin stats here. It's entirely indisputable that indirect taxes like VAT are regressive (i.e. they hit the poorest hardest). And direct taxes like Income Tax are progressive (they hit the richest hardest).
It's also a matter of factual record that no Tory Govt has ever reduced VAT, and no Tory Govt in my lifetime has ever increased Income Tax.
Like I say, draw your own conclusions.
Fair point I misread that, but the point still stands someone with more disposable income will push it in to other areas that incur less VAT, that's obvious.
-
BFYP.
Yes! And that's precisely the point! So poorer people pay far more VAT as a proportion of their disposable income than richer people. And so, increases in VAT disproportionately hit the poor.
There's nothing to argue about here. Increasing VAT while decreasing Income Tax increases the gap in spending power between the rich and the poor. And the Tories, whenever they can, decrease Income Tax and increase VAT. Those issues are simple facts.
-
It's a daft stat though. I mean saying a person with £1m of disposable income spends less on VAT as a % because they spend less as of the % total is hardly a problem is it? I mean how do you get around it, tax on savings and investments etc, force them to spend it?
-
No, it's very, very simple. It's not a daft stat at all.
VAT takes a higher proportion of a poor person's disposable income than a rich person's. It a simple fact.
Because VAT is charged on things that are essential for most people to be able to function at anything above bare existence level (clothes, petrol, sanitary towels, eating out, cars, computers, phones, holidays) then there's no escaping it. Poor people spend a larger proportion of their income on these things than richer people, so CHOOSING to apply high rates of VAT instead of increasing, say, income tax hits the poor hardest.
If you care about poverty and inequality, you deal with that by striking a different balance between income tax and VAT.
It's not difficult. It's entirely down to what you want to prioritise.
-
Exactly which is why we have so many people in poverty.
-
No, it's very, very simple. It's not a daft stat at all.
VAT takes a higher proportion of a poor person's disposable income than a rich person's. It a simple fact.
Because VAT is charged on things that are essential for most people to be able to function at anything above bare existence level (clothes, petrol, sanitary towels, eating out, cars, computers, phones, holidays) then there's no escaping it. Poor people spend a larger proportion of their income on these things than richer people, so CHOOSING to apply high rates of VAT instead of increasing, say, income tax hits the poor hardest.
If you care about poverty and inequality, you deal with that by striking a different balance between income tax and VAT.
It's not difficult. It's entirely down to what you want to prioritise.
Not only that, the more you move towards income tax rather than VAT, the more that the poorer end of the economy has as disposable income, the more things they can afford to buy and the more that that stimulates demand and economic growth.
-
Textbook economics that appears to have been ignored over the past decade...
-
The Tory right-wing rejected the deal because of the backstop agreement. They wanted to leave but didn't think the deal was right. The Remainers, on the other hand, wanted to reject everything in order to have a second referendum.
This may assist those people trying to explain the ERG position and what sort of deal the Tory hard right want. Or if they want a deal at all?
Steve Baker, ERG chairman - why the backstop is not the only problem in the withdrawal agreement
https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1140637696097955841?s=12
-
Good call Wilts.
Fascinating how the likes of Baker were utterly vague about what Brexit meant in 2016, but crystal clear now. The ERG, representing maybe 15-20% of MPs, and the views of maybe, at a push, 25-30% of the population, had hijacked Brexit for their own ends.
-
No, it's very, very simple. It's not a daft stat at all.
VAT takes a higher proportion of a poor person's disposable income than a rich person's. It a simple fact.
Because VAT is charged on things that are essential for most people to be able to function at anything above bare existence level (clothes, petrol, sanitary towels, eating out, cars, computers, phones, holidays) then there's no escaping it. Poor people spend a larger proportion of their income on these things than richer people, so CHOOSING to apply high rates of VAT instead of increasing, say, income tax hits the poor hardest.
If you care about poverty and inequality, you deal with that by striking a different balance between income tax and VAT.
It's not difficult. It's entirely down to what you want to prioritise.
I agree on a couple of things but is our vat rate high? The link I previously posted demonstrates it to be lower than much of Europe and it can only be substantially cut by leaving the eu!
We will disagree simply as I think current tax rates are on the whole fair.
-
''According to EU law, EU Member States are required to levy a standard VAT rate of at least 15 percent and a reduced rate of at least 5 percent. Switzerland, as a non-EU country, levies the lowest VAT rate of only 7.7 percent, followed by Luxembourg (17 percent), Turkey (18 percent), and Germany (19 percent).Feb 28, 2019''
Not sure how this works in practice but a low rate in Switzerland has not made it a low cost place to visit.
This has a list of all the rates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax
-
Why would you need to 'turn on the money taps' isn't brexit supposed to be xmas every day, win-win, up to one's neck in trade deals where we sell our goods at the best prices and import for next to nothing?????? Nirvana on steroids???? business must be gearing up for the rush????? I can see the street parties now, bunting and pork pies with Vera Lynn singing in the background
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovfQjR3iU-A
''Chancellor announces spending round amid election speculation, as Boris Johnson gets ready to turn on the taps''
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/08/chancellor-announces-spending-round-amid-election-speculation/
''Tories accused of 'panic measures' for fast-tracking spending plans before Brexit''
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-accused-panic-measures-fast-18865361
-
''According to EU law, EU Member States are required to levy a standard VAT rate of at least 15 percent and a reduced rate of at least 5 percent. Switzerland, as a non-EU country, levies the lowest VAT rate of only 7.7 percent, followed by Luxembourg (17 percent), Turkey (18 percent), and Germany (19 percent).Feb 28, 2019''
Not sure how this works in practice but a low rate in Switzerland has not made it a low cost place to visit.
This has a list of all the rates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax
The idea behind VAT is that eventually VAT rates across the EU are harmonised ie are at the same rate in every EU member state as part of the Single Market so that there doesn't have to be the bureaucratic artificial harmonisation of Intrastat.
However, there's never been the political will to do it. Ever. But that's not you get told by those who want to portray the UK as being under the EU's political jackboot.
-
''According to EU law, EU Member States are required to levy a standard VAT rate of at least 15 percent and a reduced rate of at least 5 percent. Switzerland, as a non-EU country, levies the lowest VAT rate of only 7.7 percent, followed by Luxembourg (17 percent), Turkey (18 percent), and Germany (19 percent).Feb 28, 2019''
Not sure how this works in practice but a low rate in Switzerland has not made it a low cost place to visit.
This has a list of all the rates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax
The idea behind VAT is that eventually VAT rates across the EU are harmonised ie are at the same rate in every EU member state as part of the Single Market so that there doesn't have to be the bureaucratic artificial harmonisation of Intrastat.
However, there's never been the political will to do it. Ever. But that's not you get told by those who want to portray the UK as being under the EU's political jackboot.
What I do know is that the last Labour government wanted to reduce energy VAT to zero for pensioners, but were unable to do so due to the EU VAT rules you refer to.,
-
HA, it may have been that as the ''The EU commission wants to abolish or reduce the scope of exemptions'' that they wouldn't allow further additions? only a guess though.
Exemption from VAT
There is a distinction between goods and services that are exempt from VAT and those that are subject to 0% VAT. The seller of exempt goods is not entitled to reclaim VAT on business purchases, whereas the seller of goods and services rated at 0% is entitled.[27] An example would be a book manufacturer in Ireland, who purchases paper including VAT at the 23% rate,[28] and sells books at the 0% rate;[29] the manufacturer would be entitled to reclaim the VAT paid on the paper as the business is making taxable supplies. In countries like Sweden and Finland non-profit organisations such as sports clubs are exempt from all VAT, and have to pay full VAT for purchases without reclaim.[citation needed][clarification needed] Also in Malta, the purchase of food for human consumption from supermarkets, grocers etc., the purchase of pharmaceutical products, school tuition fees and scheduled bus service fares are exempted from VAT.[30] The EU commission wants to abolish or reduce the scope of exemptions.[31] There are objections from sports federations since this would create cost and a lot of bureaucracy for voluntary staff.[32]
-
''According to EU law, EU Member States are required to levy a standard VAT rate of at least 15 percent and a reduced rate of at least 5 percent. Switzerland, as a non-EU country, levies the lowest VAT rate of only 7.7 percent, followed by Luxembourg (17 percent), Turkey (18 percent), and Germany (19 percent).Feb 28, 2019''
Not sure how this works in practice but a low rate in Switzerland has not made it a low cost place to visit.
This has a list of all the rates
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax
The idea behind VAT is that eventually VAT rates across the EU are harmonised ie are at the same rate in every EU member state as part of the Single Market so that there doesn't have to be the bureaucratic artificial harmonisation of Intrastat.
However, there's never been the political will to do it. Ever. But that's not you get told by those who want to portray the UK as being under the EU's political jackboot.
What I do know is that the last Labour government wanted to reduce energy VAT to zero for pensioners, but were unable to do so due to the EU VAT rules you refer to.,
Yes, because the Tory government before threw away the zero-rating on ALL domestic fuel that the UK - and only the UK in the EU - had. Because those EU VAT rules are intended to gradually move countries VAT rates closer together, once you give up a zero-rating you can't get it back. If Labour hadn't been elected in 1997 and reversed the intended domestic fuel decision back the 5% lowest that was allowed, we'd all be now be paying 20% on all our domestic fuel.
But of course, that doesn't disproportionately affect the poorest in our society, especially those on fixed incomes, at all... :silly:
-
The Tory right-wing rejected the deal because of the backstop agreement. They wanted to leave but didn't think the deal was right. The Remainers, on the other hand, wanted to reject everything in order to have a second referendum.
This may assist those people trying to explain the ERG position and what sort of deal the Tory hard right want. Or if they want a deal at all?
Steve Baker, ERG chairman - why the backstop is not the only problem in the withdrawal agreement
https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1140637696097955841?s=12
A bit more on this has now come to light. When David Frost ('our' new EU negotiator) went to Brussels last week for talks with EU officials he was asked if the backstop was removed would Parliament pass the WA. His answer was No.
Johnson now rejects all the level playing field commitments in the WA that were put in there to stop us scrapping environmental/food/health & safety/working time regulations after we leave.
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1159569608644472842
-
Normally when there is a big announcement or the opening of a new business venture, the Olympics or the Football World Cup, a new direction for the country there is celebration, fireworks, positivity, cheering, street parades .............. why is the country doing the opposite like we are preparing for war or disaster?
Why is the government itself considering a plan for the country that is likely to trigger a recession?
The Times:
''Boris Johnson is drawing up plans for a bailout fund to prop up businesses in the event of a no-deal Brexit amid fears that the economy is on the cusp of a recession.
Michael Gove, who is leading the no-deal preparations, confirmed for the first time that ministers were working on a package to help companies at risk of collapse.
The Times understands that the government has drawn up a secret list of big British employers that are considered most at risk, with the worst affected expected to be in the construction and manufacturing sectors''
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/bailout-fund-to-prop-up-businesses-after-brexit-8w2883fz2
-
What will we do with all this control we're taking back, come and get it while it's hot.
A memo from a government department mistakenly emailed to the BBC says
"At this stage, there is a lot of uncertainty about the sufficiency of enforcement in a no-deal because we have 12 vessels that need to monitor a space three times the size of the surface area of the UK."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49302778
-
As I live on the continent and have dual nationality I am more focused on what is going on within the EU....in a nutshell it is stagnating .It has no mission statement as to what it aims to achieve over the next 5 years as most organisations would have .It”s values are unclear since on one hand it interferes in Polish and Hungarian state matters but turns a blind eye to the fascist stance of the Madrid government regarding the Catalan political prisoners .It craves a European army of 27 nations yet has no foreign policy to guide such an army on the outbreak of world events that might require an army to mobilise .It has no plans for a navy nor airforce nor anti terrorist surveillance infrastructure...it is impossible to take such strategies seriously.A trade deal with the EU would suffice for UK..and a free flow of labour provided people were documented with an ID card like the ones I have held when living and working in Italy,Spain,France and Belgium throughout my life .
-
Nice to still be able to get the odd grim laugh out of our national hari-kiri.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Mannerings69/status/1160179004055400448
-
That man Banks loves publicity aye?
Smuggling claims cast shadow over Brexit’s £8m diamond geezer Arron Banks
The National Crime Agency is examining fresh allegations about Arron Banks and his South African mines.
The National Crime Agency (NCA) is examining claims that Arron Banks, the businessman who helped fund Brexit, smuggled diamonds out of South Africa.
The NCA has been passed allegations made by Banks’s former business partner that Banks attempted to source black-market gems from Zimbabwe and pretend they had come from his mines in South Africa.
The evidence, collected by South Africa’s organised crime unit, includes a claim that Banks was “dealing with Russians” and trying “to marry . . . illegally gotten diamonds” from other African nations with output from his own struggling mines.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/smuggling-claims-cast-shadow-over-brexits-8m-diamond-geezer-arron-banks-t9dfgklhz
-
Despite it appears knowing nothing about UK exports and never having heard of google Rodger Bootle from the Telegraph proceeds to tell us how we can trade with the world by presumably reducing the UK workforce to serfs and bringing back the barter system where you work for him for 80-100 hours a week without public holidays or annual leave and he gives you and your family the scraps from his table.
paywall: Singapore-style reforms can cut through Britain's tax and trade red tape outside the EU
''Now that Brexit is getting closer, more attention is being directed to our future trade relationships, especially with the US but also with the rest of the world. This is entirely appropriate. Trade matters, and the tariff regime and associated trading arrangements have some bearing on trade performance. But nothing like as much as people commonly think. You don’t need trade agreements in order to trade. This is shown by the fact that, despite there currently being no trade agreement between us, our largest single export market is the US''
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/08/11/tax-rule-reform-cant-optional-extra-following-eu-exit/
Export market table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_United_Kingdom
-
We're ok, Caroline Lucas has solved it all!
She's bloody bonkers.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49314840
-
We're ok, Caroline Lucas has solved it all!
She's bloody bonkers.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49314840
Well the women can't do much worse than the men have done on this so far.
I don't count the maybot by the way, god only knows if shes human, never mind female!
-
We're ok, Caroline Lucas has solved it all!
She's bloody bonkers.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49314840
Well the women can't do much worse than the men have done on this so far.
I don't count the maybot by the way, god only knows if shes human, never mind female!
I'll second that GR, men are more likely to be listened to even in 2019.
-
Well. It's kind of gone like this.
First message. We'll take back control and unleash the glorious power of the UK once we're freed from the jackboot if the EUSSR.
2) Well, yes, there may be some teething problems but it's nothing we can't handle.
3) Yes, alright, we KNOW there are going to be 20 mile jams on the M20, with some time critical foods and medicines not getting through but Dunkirk Spirit, eh?
4) We survived the Plague, we'll survive Brexit.
5) We reserve the right to shoot you if you leave your house after sunset when we leave.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sweeping-powers-to-impose-curfews-and-alter-the-law-under-no-deal-brexit-llx3t3v7v#
-
Don't worry there will be food on the shelves, it will just cost more that's all.
''Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
Despite Brexiters’ assurances of tariffless trade, a House of Lords inquiry concluded: “… in either a ‘deal’ or ‘no-deal’ scenario, Brexit will result in some additional border checks and documentation requirements for food imported from the EU to the UK. These will increase the time it takes for food to reach shop shelves and result in additional costs.”
In 2016 more than £30.3bn of Britain’s food imports and £12.3bn of its food exports were with the EU, totalling almost £1,300 of trade every second and highlighting the scale of economic disruption on both sides if the UK crashes out without a deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop
-
this whole f**king situation is f**king ridiculous. no tangible benefits to anyone other than millionaires with money saved offshore, and no-one on here, in the media, in parliament, can say with any certainty britain will prosper outside the EU! Pretty much all industry experts and economists say things will be bad or f**king terrible, the supermarkets have all guaranteed there will be prise rises, and the working class will be demonstrably worse off over the next 5 to 10 years.
W...T....F
-
Exactly wtf
-
Cheers bjw - Its a rant I have wanted to make myself for over a year
The whole thing sucks and where is the architect of the mess Mr David Cameron - oh yes probably looking at what he calls (with a smirk) his Wifes field somewhere near Scunthorpe *
* Normanby Park to give the field its more accurate description
This is as Bjw s post encapsulates the problem with all the career politicians - not to be trusted ANY of them no matter what colour of politics they "preach"
If we evntually DO leave the EU I would expect in less time than it took to get us out from the 75 vote there will be a mass movement to rejoin. I just hope the devious b******s dont if it comes to a Referndum in 15 years or so put a sensible target & say it has to be won by with at least 60% of those voting saying yes or of course no to effect a change
-
Go for it DW it's good to hear from someone that knows what he wants and where a lot of the blame lies for this f#ckfest.
-
Don't worry there will be food on the shelves, it will just cost more that's all.
''Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
Despite Brexiters’ assurances of tariffless trade, a House of Lords inquiry concluded: “… in either a ‘deal’ or ‘no-deal’ scenario, Brexit will result in some additional border checks and documentation requirements for food imported from the EU to the UK. These will increase the time it takes for food to reach shop shelves and result in additional costs.”
In 2016 more than £30.3bn of Britain’s food imports and £12.3bn of its food exports were with the EU, totalling almost £1,300 of trade every second and highlighting the scale of economic disruption on both sides if the UK crashes out without a deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop
Don't worry there will be food on the shelves, it will just cost more that's all.
''Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
Despite Brexiters’ assurances of tariffless trade, a House of Lords inquiry concluded: “… in either a ‘deal’ or ‘no-deal’ scenario, Brexit will result in some additional border checks and documentation requirements for food imported from the EU to the UK. These will increase the time it takes for food to reach shop shelves and result in additional costs.”
In 2016 more than £30.3bn of Britain’s food imports and £12.3bn of its food exports were with the EU, totalling almost £1,300 of trade every second and highlighting the scale of economic disruption on both sides if the UK crashes out without a deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop
Don't worry there will be food on the shelves, it will just cost more that's all.
''Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
Despite Brexiters’ assurances of tariffless trade, a House of Lords inquiry concluded: “… in either a ‘deal’ or ‘no-deal’ scenario, Brexit will result in some additional border checks and documentation requirements for food imported from the EU to the UK. These will increase the time it takes for food to reach shop shelves and result in additional costs.”
In 2016 more than £30.3bn of Britain’s food imports and £12.3bn of its food exports were with the EU, totalling almost £1,300 of trade every second and highlighting the scale of economic disruption on both sides if the UK crashes out without a deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop
Don't worry there will be food on the shelves, it will just cost more that's all.
''Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
Despite Brexiters’ assurances of tariffless trade, a House of Lords inquiry concluded: “… in either a ‘deal’ or ‘no-deal’ scenario, Brexit will result in some additional border checks and documentation requirements for food imported from the EU to the UK. These will increase the time it takes for food to reach shop shelves and result in additional costs.”
In 2016 more than £30.3bn of Britain’s food imports and £12.3bn of its food exports were with the EU, totalling almost £1,300 of trade every second and highlighting the scale of economic disruption on both sides if the UK crashes out without a deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/aug/13/how-a-no-deal-brexit-threatens-your-weekly-food-shop
could eat British food that would make it abit cheaper
-
Yeah but, yeah but...yeah but...
We took back control.
-
Sure, as long as you are aware that 50% of what is eaten in the UK is imported BP, and knowing how competition works local traders will be all too ready to put up the prices of local food as well.
National Statistics
Food Statistics in your pocket 2017 - Global and UK supply, Updated 9 October 2018
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-global-and-uk-supply
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
-
If it makes sense to you BP.
-
Does it not to you Sydney? Even if brexit didn’t exist it would be nice to try and support British industries, while it is not always possible or practical surely it would help them
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
Why do you think we don't do that now BP?
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
Economics 101
Increased demand = higher prices.
PS I'm sure British farmers would love for you tell them how you think land that can produce 100% of something can suddenly produce 200% of it. And instantly too.
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
Economics 101
Increased demand = higher prices.
PS I'm sure British farmers would love for you tell them how you think land that can produce 100% of something can suddenly produce 200% of it. And instantly too.
. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJQ5uMv1JdsFMALTJ0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTByaW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1565732876/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theplymouthdaily.co.uk%2fnews%2ffood-drink%2fback-british-farming-put-more-british-food-more-british-plates/RK=2/RS=Ppzj4xDXAJrOHwRKcnjEDND6Igw- I never said instantly as there will be no need 2, were suddenly not going to run out of food you no
-
Brexit was a good idea because we can reduce tariffs and import cheap stuff from around the world (c Jacob Rees Mogg and some posters on here).
Now it appears 'don't worry we wont starve because we have plenty of our own turnips'!
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
Economics 101
Increased demand = higher prices.
PS I'm sure British farmers would love for you tell them how you think land that can produce 100% of something can suddenly produce 200% of it. And instantly too.
Just add lots of bulls**t - :turd: lets face it there should be plenty kicking about after 3 years of this "impasse"
-
That would be easy to change thou more people including myself should buy more British products
Economics 101
Increased demand = higher prices.
PS I'm sure British farmers would love for you tell them how you think land that can produce 100% of something can suddenly produce 200% of it. And instantly too.
. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJQ5uMv1JdsFMALTJ0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTByaW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1565732876/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theplymouthdaily.co.uk%2fnews%2ffood-drink%2fback-british-farming-put-more-british-food-more-british-plates/RK=2/RS=Ppzj4xDXAJrOHwRKcnjEDND6Igw- I never said instantly as there will be no need 2, were suddenly not going to run out of food you no
A six-year-old page of waffle that ignores a question in true BB style...is that all you've got?
-
At least I've got what you very much lack Mr Wiggerly. Style!
-
All those with vested interests showing their colours.
Hotelier threw £12,000 victory party for Johnson, records reveal
PM received almost £650,000 in campaign donations, register of MPs’ interests shows
Now let me think why would an international hotelier support brexit? would it be so he can import food cheaper, as a previous post shows that's not on the cards, what are the biggest outlays that business people make, wages and rent must be high on the list.
No-deal would mean higher costs therefore businesses would be looking to make savings. In little britain without the protection of the EU workers will be exposed to a new form of industrial relations, think back to a period before unions were invented, think of the gig-economy or zero-hours contracts on steroids.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/13/hotelier-threw-12000-victory-party-for-boris-johnson-register-reveals
-
Feeling nervous at all SS, no reason really just asking?
-
Just to throw something else into this.
Did anyone else see the BBC's Beyond 100 Days last week (30 July)?
https://archive.org/details/BBCNEWS_20190730_180000_Beyond_100_Days
The interview at about 7:43 p.m. was with a former US senator who is part of a committee set up to 'Protect the Good Friday Agreement'. The gist was that there are so many 'Irish' Americans worried about a hard border, including members of the 'Ways and Means Committee'. This committee will be required to accept any trade deal the UK makes with the US, and it is likely (according to the interviewee at least) to block any such deal in the event of a no deal Brexit and a hard border.
Very scary to hear such things from the basket we look to be putting all our eggs in.
Ignore what Bolton (and by implication Trump) are saying - as I suggested above a deal with the US may not be as easy as we think in a no deal scenario:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49348062
The Ireland/Northern Ireland border problem and its consequences have been severely underestimated since day one, and continue to be.
-
Couldn't agree more Dutch.
Have you noticed the line coming out of No10? The "anti-democratic" backstop has to go. But not a word of a suggestion about how you then deal with the border. Not a word.
This isn't serious negotiating. It's convincing the gullible that the EU are to blame for imposing this "anti-democratic" arrangement on us.
-
Feeling nervous at all SS, no reason really just asking?
Definitely. If we don't get a striker in, Fleetwood will stuff us.
-
I wouldn't worry if I were you Steve, it's all smoke and mirrors....
Ian Dunt - Johnson is a vain and ignorant sociopath but he is not stupid. All he cares about is his premiership, and he knows no-deal will end it.
He is bluffing. But he has miscalculated. And he will fail.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/is-boris-johnson-bluffing-brexit-no-deal-parliament-westminster
-
And for the sake of balance here is an excellent piece on how hardcore remainers have become extremists.
Loud, obssesive and tribal - they hate Fararge, Johnson and Corbyn but love legal experts and James O'Brien:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/13/brexit-remain-radicalisation-fbpe-peoples-vote
-
And for the sake of balance here is an excellent piece on how hardcore remainers have become extremists.
Loud, obssesive and tribal - they hate Fararge, Johnson and Corbyn but love legal experts and James O'Brien:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/13/brexit-remain-radicalisation-fbpe-peoples-vote
Ahh don't you just love polemic journalists.
They are paid to write guff like "(Remainists) have helped set the new conventional wisdom that Labour faces electoral wipeout if it doesn’t commit to a second referendum," free from the need to provide stuff like evidence to back up their assertions.
Note that it's not election results or the stark opinion poll data that has made that point. No, it's the opinions of a few thousand obsessives apparently.
-
I wouldn't worry if I were you Steve, it's all smoke and mirrors....
Ian Dunt - Johnson is a vain and ignorant sociopath but he is not stupid. All he cares about is his premiership, and he knows no-deal will end it.
He is bluffing. But he has miscalculated. And he will fail.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/is-boris-johnson-bluffing-brexit-no-deal-parliament-westminster
I've thought all along that Johnson won't have the bottle to force a no-deal through, but I also wonder what his alternatives are.
He's in a corner at the moment, and I can't see what his next move will be.
-
SS
Of course he won't push No Deal through. Because it would do very serious damage to the country and, in an era of reall bad PMs, he would go down in history as the very worst.
What he's doing is manoeuvring Parliament into a position where THEY have to stop No Deal. Then he plays the "You, the honest, democracy loving electorate have been betrayed by these bas**rd MPs," card when we go into the Election.
It is shameless politicking. And so f**king transparent if you're prepared to look at it.
-
I don't disagree Billy but I do see one big flaw in that 'plan'.
It can only be delivered by a number of Tory MP's voting against Johnson. So he will be going into an election telling the electorate that his own MP's can't be trusted. There will only be one winner from that - and it won't be him.
-
SS
Of course he won't push No Deal through. Because it would do very serious damage to the country and, in an era of reall bad PMs, he would go down in history as the very worst.
What he's doing is manoeuvring Parliament into a position where THEY have to stop No Deal. Then he plays the "You, the honest, democracy loving electorate have been betrayed by these bas**rd MPs," card when we go into the Election.
It is shameless politicking. And so f**king transparent if you're prepared to look at it.
The groundwork is already taking place
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49348072
-
Wilts.
You appear not to grasp the war going on inside the Tory party. They are already chucking bombs between the right wing and the centre. Hasn't stopped the Tories pulling well ahead of Labour in the polls...
-
SS
Of course he won't push No Deal through. Because it would do very serious damage to the country and, in an era of reall bad PMs, he would go down in history as the very worst.
What he's doing is manoeuvring Parliament into a position where THEY have to stop No Deal. Then he plays the "You, the honest, democracy loving electorate have been betrayed by these bas**rd MPs," card when we go into the Election.
It is shameless politicking. And so f**king transparent if you're prepared to look at it.
The groundwork is already taking place
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49348072
Playing the gullible.
He's blaming MPs for undermining the concept of No Deal, saying it's weakening his negotiating position. But he hasn't got a negotiating position. He's made up red lines that the EU would never accept in a million years.
This is all a strategy to blame Remain MPs for Brexit hitting the buffers again when the Election comes.
-
And here's some more of him playing the gullible in the first 40 seconds of this video.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1161704957374062593
Fact. The EU bent over backwards to offer us a solution to our own crisis, by proposing the backstop. They have gone as far as they possibly can. If they ripped up the backstop, they would be shitting all over an EU member (Ireland) to assist a country that wants out (UK). That is simply not going to happen. Full stop.
But there's Johnson saying the EU are just playing hardball and it's MP's fault for undermining his negotiating position.
If you remember that he's an unprincipled, amoral Kitson with no interest in anything but his own position and career, it all makes perfect sense. If you buy into it, you're allowing yourself to be played.
-
So when does everyone think the Election will be?
-
My guess (and it is only a guess) is that Parliament, one way or another, blocks No Deal in late Oct. Johnson either forced to go to Brussels to ask for a Brexit extension and responds by calling a "People Vs Treacherous MPs" election in Nov/Dec.
Or he refuses to go to Brussels, he loses a vote of No Confidence in Parliament and is replaced by a caretaker PM who negotiated the extension then dissolves Parliament and there's an Election in Nov/Dec.
I can't see any way we get to the end of the year without an Election.
-
Bookies have a 2019 GE odds on. Best price you can get on it is 2/5.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/year-of-next-general-election
-
Wilts.
You appear not to grasp the war going on inside the Tory party. They are already chucking bombs between the right wing and the centre. Hasn't stopped the Tories pulling well ahead of Labour in the polls...
You don't win an election in opinion polls - you win it by gaining most seats.
He is hated in Scotland so will probably loose all 12 MP's there. Lib Dems have a lot of close marginals in the south west/south/welsh borders, estimates show between 12 and 30 gains. Thats 30+ seats he needs to take off Labour just to stand still. Then the Tory MP's who vote to bring him down - what will happen in their seats - why would a Johnson supporter vote for them?
It will be another hung parliament with the Lib Dems holding the balance of power - thats what ALL the polls are showing. Who they support will decide who the next PM is. Vote Swinson get Boris will look good on the side of the bus.
-
Wilts.
If YouGov are right (and they got the EU election bang on) and it ends up
Con 30-32
Lab 20-22
LD 20-22
Johnson will win at a canter.
Vote Swindon get Boris is a good one.
Trouble is, Vote Corbyn get Brexit will also have traction.
And if Lab and the LDs spend the campaign laying into each other...
-
If yougov are right then the projections are Johnson will loose 1 seat (to the Brexit Party). So we shall be exactly where we are - ungovernable.
How did yougov do on Peterborough btw?
-
Billy,
The error you keep making is to apply polling estimates of national trend, (themselves with wide uncertainty ranges), to local outcomes.
You have referred before to "polling evidence". Polls are NOT evidence of anything other than the assumptions behind the methodology.
Two questions;
1) What does a 30% share of the vote buy you in a general election with a 4 way split?
2) How do you apportion the vote between parties in seats which are clearly 2 way marginals?
I suspect votes will return to the "least worst" option with a chance of winning the particular seat.
You seem to assume Labour need to achieve a 40% + share to become the single largest party.
I don't know why that would be the case in a 4 way split.
What evidence (please, not polls) supports this view?
-
Albie
1) Where have I ever said that Labour need 40+% to be the largest party? You're a bright lad. You do t need to set up straw men to argue against.
2) I'm not making any assumptions on local effects, other than to claim that a party that polls 20% nationally as an average will not be remotely close to being the largest party in Parliament.
3) You keep on saying that voters will make sensible choices. And yet we know that several hundred thousand left-wing voters didn't make the sensible choice to keep the Tories out in 2010. I'm bemused that you think it will be different this time.
-
BST,
I hoped that you could resist the temptation to deflect off the point, in the manner of BB.
You have many times referred to Labour polling below the high water mark of the 2017 GE, and concluded (incorrectly) that Labour cannot be the largest single party on the basis of a lower % of the vote.
This is why I have asked Q1 and 2 above.
So what is the answer, please?
-
No Albie. You are wrong. I haven't said that Labour cannot be the largest party on a vote share lower than the high water mark. You can stop doubling down on this whenever you want and then maybe I'll start addressing the questions you raise. Until then, you appear to be discussing this either in ignorance or in bad faith.
I fail to see how I can be "deflecting off point" when I'm actually directly addressing a specific question of yours.
-
And there you have it, no trade deal with the US if you f#c# with the backstop and even if and when a deal is made it will be eat my sh#t, hmm can't wait. Well at least UK kids will grow up, and up and ...........
''UK must accept US food standards in trade deal, says farm chief''
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49353220
-
Has Hammond been slinking around the forum using a VPN?
''Hammond’s argument, set out in a Times article and a Today programme interview, boils down to five big points. First, the hit to the economy from no deal will be both immediate and enduring. Second, no deal risks hastening the break-up of the United Kingdom. Third, voters were not offered no deal in 2016 and did not vote for it. Fourth, Johnson’s demand to scrap the Irish backstop is a wrecking tactic designed to hasten a no-deal outcome. Finally, a sovereign parliament can, should and will stop no deal''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/14/uk-nation-defining-battle-split-tories
-
Wilts.
If YouGov are right (and they got the EU election bang on) and it ends up
Con 30-32
Lab 20-22
LD 20-22
Johnson will win at a canter.
Vote Swindon get Boris is a good one.
Trouble is, Vote Corbyn get Brexit will also have traction.
And if Lab and the LDs spend the campaign laying into each other...
It's already started Billy. The hysterical Jo Swinson and Mr Slimeball Chuka Umunna are both laying into Corbyn's plans to head a government of national unity.
Who on Earth would listen to a man who's been in 3 different political parties in less than 12 months? If I were a Remainer I'd be seriously concerned about such people representing my views.
-
''Leaders call for £39bn for Northern Powerhouse Rail project''
Boris Johnson has said ''a trans-Pennine transport link would turbo-charge the economy"
And if we get No-Deal, yes yes yes we can still afford it and there will be 1st class seats for everyone.
but its got aaaaaaaaabsolutely nooooooooooothing to do with an election honest and we will honour the promise after the election promise you have my word.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-49321579
-
They might even get round to ditching the Pacer trains.
Their withdrawal date was years ago - and it was all failing Grayling could ever say when challenged and now just last week they withdrew ONE F****R !
One down and about 78 more to go. Dont worry Johnson / Grayling they are almost exclusively used by we Northerners !
-
Just seen this Tweet which made me chuckle in an ironis way
2016: TURKEY ARE TRYING TO JOIN THE EU!!!
2016 Scunthorpe votes 68.68% to leave the EU
2019: British Steel in Scunthorpe goes into administration because of Brexit
2019 Turkey buys British Steel Scunthorpe and saves 4,500 jobs
August 2019 Ironic-o-meter just about exploded
-
Just in leaked Whiteshall plans for no-deal brexit show Brititain will face shortages of Food, Fuel, medicine and Jam.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9745142/cabinets-leaked-no-deal-brexit-plan/ :whistle:
-
David Davis: ''remainers backing Jeremy Corbyn should be careful what they wish for''
Yes that's right we wouldn't want total 777king chaos like we've had for the past 3 years with the state ungovernable 3 leaders in 3 years mass resignations from the ministry, rebels walking out, Britain's economy down the plughole and the nation divided. Let's all play nicely and vote for boris, not.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9743363/david-davis-tory-rebels-backing-corbyn/
-
.... or put another way - I just found this on Twitter
Brexit is the greatest political heist of all time. A giant con led by group of right wing libertarians who exploited the concerns of millions of people to convince them that they were taking back control, when in fact, they are losing control to the people who conned them.
-
David Davis: ''remainers backing Jeremy Corbyn should be careful what they wish for''
Yes that's right we wouldn't want total 777king chaos like we've had for the past 3 years with the state ungovernable 3 leaders in 3 years mass resignations from the ministry, rebels walking out, Britain's economy down the plughole and the nation divided. Let's all play nicely and vote for boris, not.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9743363/david-davis-tory-rebels-backing-corbyn/
it’s all well saying that Sydney but do you think Corbyn is the answer or will Britain still be divided
-
Of course Britain will still be divided. Whatever happens, we're left deeply divided for a generation.
Question is, to we end up deeply divided, or deeply divided with no clean drinking water coming through the taps, and lorries full of urgent medical supplies stuck for 60 hours at Calais and Dover as the leaked Govt planning doc today said could very well happen in the event of No Deal.
-
BP, in the short term to guide the country out of no-deal danger yes I'm confident Corbyn could do that, at least he could be trusted not to try to deliberately fail just to get no-deal. Boris has shown the world that he's untrustworthy that his word is worthless so why would you trust him to take the best options for the country rather than himself. You never know when he's telling the truth he can't answer a straight question his minders are pulling the strings and now as they were in the leadership race are trying not to expose him to public scrutiny. Look at the fb pmq's all the hard questions filtered out.
-
Of course Britain will still be divided. Whatever happens, we're left deeply divided for a generation.
Question is, to we end up deeply divided, or deeply divided with no clean drinking water coming through the taps, and lorries full of urgent medical supplies stuck for 60 hours at Calais and Dover as the leaked Govt planning doc today said could very well happen in the event of No Deal.
. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJS9RdilpdbEkAIkB0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTBydHRqMjgyBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM1BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1566243549/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2finews.co.uk%2fnews%2fbrexit%2fno-deal-brexit-dover-calais-ports-consequences-queues-france%2f/RK=2/RS=5TPWbXSWPlt3Yw1OtUWP7a2RKbA- Maybe this chap is right
-
Have you been asleep for a couple of days BP and missed the leaked gov't paper predicting more chaos than the past 3 years?
-
Of course Britain will still be divided. Whatever happens, we're left deeply divided for a generation.
Question is, to we end up deeply divided, or deeply divided with no clean drinking water coming through the taps, and lorries full of urgent medical supplies stuck for 60 hours at Calais and Dover as the leaked Govt planning doc today said could very well happen in the event of No Deal.
. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJS9RdilpdbEkAIkB0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTBydHRqMjgyBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM1BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1566243549/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2finews.co.uk%2fnews%2fbrexit%2fno-deal-brexit-dover-calais-ports-consequences-queues-france%2f/RK=2/RS=5TPWbXSWPlt3Yw1OtUWP7a2RKbA- Maybe this chap is right
Odd that our Govt's own planning document says there is a serious risk of a shortage of food, chemicals for water treatment and medical supplies, and that there may be 60 hour delays at Dover.
-
Looks like we can add the Financial Times to the list of organisations in on the Project Fear scam.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1163328767240081408
Mind, they ARE talking about the damage that's already been done to our economy, rather than the carnage yet to come, but I'm sure you Leave supporters will have some reason why it's actually the Establishment trying to cheat you out of your Brexit.
-
Have you been asleep for a couple of days BP and missed the leaked gov't paper predicting more chaos than the past 3 years?
yes they said that was worse case scenario
-
No. Michael Gove said it was the "very, very worst case scenario". But, as usual, he's lying to you.
The entire planning strategy is NOT a worst case scenario, and certainly not the "very, very worst case". SOME of the assumptions are based on a "reasonable worst case" but most of them are reasonable, credible assumptions of what No Deal will result in.
-
''Ahead of Johnson’s talks, No 10 said the prime minister has been clear that “there cannot be any actual negotiations unless the backstop goes; that’s the message he has delivered to leaders in his phone conversations and he will do that face to face”.
“We have been clear that what the EU needs to understand is that unless the withdrawal agreement can be reopened and the backstop abolished, there isn’t any prospect of a deal.”
Johnson is a funny stupid lying kitson, knowing the EU has said no negotiations of anything, he then trots out "unless you change the backstop there will be no negotiations"???
His chief advisor BB said "we will be putting some new tyres on the bike and repainting the hall"
-
Jesus f**king wept.
Have you seen this? Have you SEEN what our PM is saying in our name in his letter to Donald Tusk?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/106014/read-full-boris-johnsons
If you can't be arsed, I'll precis it.
1) We can't have the backstop because that would mean staying in the CU.
2) Having said we want to leave the CU, we don't want any customs checks at the border between NI and Ireland.
3) We think there's some magic, creative solution to be found if we just really, really try.
4) We've f**k all idea what that solution is, but we want you to forget about that and trust us that it'll be found.
5) If it's not found, we'll...err...have to think of something else. But not the Backstop.
6) Yes, I KNOW you spent 2 years thrashing this out with May, and the Backstop is the only possible solution. I KNOW all that, but I'm not actually writing this to you Donald. I'm writing it to the great Brexit public. See, I believe that the people who want Brexit and want it NOW, are so f**king thick that they've not been paying attention this last 3 years. I reckon if I look like the hard man, slapping you down, they'll all vote for me in the Autumn. I know! Shameless, isn't it!
-
Your preaching again bst, I put a link up wha this the Calais guy said that he didn’t think there would be much if my disruption but you ignore that as he will be talking crap, what option is there get Corbyn in who will divide the country far more than brexit?
-
what would be worse losing money or having Corbyn as prime minister? It’s a hard choice rather than preach why don’t you get into your own party and try and sort that out?
-
Maybe as backstop 2 johnson should supply both sides of the border with the same armaments as the UK is supplying to Saudi Arabia so at least there is equal opportunity.
No wars between EU countries for how many years? and boris kitson-johnson wants to put his name to this one.
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
It's always good to back up bold statements with a citation or two otherwise people may accuse you of making it up BP. I'm not totally convinced by JC either although I did say the other day it may be possible for him to get a majority but time is running out if not run out..
I think that if JC doesn't get on board and support remain then the future of labour is under threat. He will of course lose the leavers but surely the young people that voted for him en masse is the future of labour and the country. Those that voted leave and still want to leave the EU well who really cares about them they are not interested in the facts about what that decision will mean the the majority of the already poor or workers rights generally and they continue to trumpet rubbish about taking back control.
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
It's always good to back up bold statements with a citation or two otherwise people may accuse you of making it up BP. I'm not totally convinced by JC either although I did say the other day it may be possible for him to get a majority but time is running out if not run out..
I think that if JC doesn't get on board and support remain then the future of labour is under threat. He will of course lose the leavers but surely the young people that voted for him en masse is the future of labour and the country. Those that voted leave and still want to leave the EU well who really cares about them they are not interested in the facts about what that decision will mean the the majority of the already poor or workers rights generally and they continue to trumpet rubbish about taking back control.
You've hit the nail on the head there Sydney; "well who really cares about them".
That's exactly the arrogant, sneering attitude that makes Brexiters more determined than ever to see this through.
-
Your preaching again bst, I put a link up wha this the Calais guy said that he didn’t think there would be much if my disruption but you ignore that as he will be talking crap, what option is there get Corbyn in who will divide the country far more than brexit?
I don't want to be funny bpool but.... one MP has been shot and killed, another had a plot on her life foiled by an informer, several people have been in court over defamation and abuse - in what way will Jeremy Corbyn putting up taxes on high earners to invest in public services be more divisive than that?
I have a lot of sympathy for what Steve says but you do reinforce Sydney's point at times.
-
SS
I understand what you are saying.
But here's the problem.
Do you REALLY think Johnson and Rees-Mogg and Gove and Patel and Raab have your interests at heart?
They have egged you on and used your frustrations to take over the Tory party. This isn't about satisfying what you want. It's about THEM.
-
Bpool.
I didn't say he was talking crap. I just asked you why you think the UK Govt is planning for major disruption.
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
It's always good to back up bold statements with a citation or two otherwise people may accuse you of making it up BP. I'm not totally convinced by JC either although I did say the other day it may be possible for him to get a majority but time is running out if not run out..
I think that if JC doesn't get on board and support remain then the future of labour is under threat. He will of course lose the leavers but surely the young people that voted for him en masse is the future of labour and the country. Those that voted leave and still want to leave the EU well who really cares about them they are not interested in the facts about what that decision will mean the the majority of the already poor or workers rights generally and they continue to trumpet rubbish about taking back control.
You've hit the nail on the head there Sydney; "well who really cares about them".
That's exactly the arrogant, sneering attitude that makes Brexiters more determined than ever to see this through.
I'm just holding the mirror up for brexiteers.
Added:
Steve i'll ask you the same as I keep asking BB, tell us what you want from brexit and what is going to be improved by it.
It's gotta be good because it is splitting the nation down the middle and we've already lost at least in monetary terms 66bn + then add the 39bn divorce bill.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/93785/how-much-money-has-brexit-cost-the-uk
-
Your preaching again bst, I put a link up wha this the Calais guy said that he didn’t think there would be much if my disruption but you ignore that as he will be talking crap, what option is there get Corbyn in who will divide the country far more than brexit?
I don't think you can divide something more than 50/50 mate x
-
This is someone you couldn't trust, trench or no trench?
https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1161156650864132096/photo/1
-
Come all ye brexiteers lend a hand your leader needs you, your country needs you, and the puzzle is: find an alternative to the backstop, easy when you have an overly large brain or is it a brian in boris's' case? maybe that's been the problem all along why he lied and cheated and why he made 'fun' of people that are different from him, all this time he's had a brian stuffed in there.
So back on a more serious note to show as a nation that we are better managed than Italy, let's do it, all hands to the pump let's find a solution and show the world we have the can-do spirit. What about a garden tunnel to France or an Airlift like the one that saved West Berlin following the war? 30 days to save boris's arse easy peasy.
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
It's always good to back up bold statements with a citation or two otherwise people may accuse you of making it up BP. I'm not totally convinced by JC either although I did say the other day it may be possible for him to get a majority but time is running out if not run out..
I think that if JC doesn't get on board and support remain then the future of labour is under threat. He will of course lose the leavers but surely the young people that voted for him en masse is the future of labour and the country. Those that voted leave and still want to leave the EU well who really cares about them they are not interested in the facts about what that decision will mean the the majority of the already poor or workers rights generally and they continue to trumpet rubbish about taking back control.
You've hit the nail on the head there Sydney; "well who really cares about them".
That's exactly the arrogant, sneering attitude that makes Brexiters more determined than ever to see this through.
''Boris Johnson news - live: Macron says UK faces 'historic vassalisation' in withering assessment of country's Brexit future ahead of PM's Paris trip''
This is why it's time for straight talking Steve when this is the future for millions living in the UK and if those voting for brexit don't appear to care why should anyone care about them?
There is still time for redemption but you have to take a deep breath and admit to yourself you were dudded, sold a pup.
I would have thought after all this time brexiteers would have a list a mile long about the great things ahead that brexit will bring.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-news-live-no-deal-macron-meeting-merkel-divorce-bill-a9074151.html
-
Jacob Reece Mogg’s company accounts show a £103 MILLION profit over the last
5 years , but paid ZERO Corporation Tax , as ultimate ownership is in the Cayman Islands.
No wonder he wants to avoid the new EU Tax laws.
This is what Brexit is really about , not making life in Donny better.
There is still time for redemption but you have to take a deep breath and admit to yourself you were dudded, sold a pup.
-
Agreed FB it's never been about taking back control, sovereignty or any other bullshit, it's about freedom of movement for businesses and their dosh.
All the promises to retain workers rights will only last till the next tory government gets in.
''The Brexiters who put their money offshore
Some of the loudest voices in the debate – many of whom want the UK to be a tax haven – have their own offshore interests''
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/09/brexiters-put-money-offshore-tax-haven
-
Ok let’s not supply Saudi let’s not have trade deals with USA as trump is a dik who else shall we not deal with or talk to? We will end up far worse off over Corbyn than brexit as he won’t deal with anyone he does not like
It's always good to back up bold statements with a citation or two otherwise people may accuse you of making it up BP. I'm not totally convinced by JC either although I did say the other day it may be possible for him to get a majority but time is running out if not run out..
I think that if JC doesn't get on board and support remain then the future of labour is under threat. He will of course lose the leavers but surely the young people that voted for him en masse is the future of labour and the country. Those that voted leave and still want to leave the EU well who really cares about them they are not interested in the facts about what that decision will mean the the majority of the already poor or workers rights generally and they continue to trumpet rubbish about taking back control.
You've hit the nail on the head there Sydney; "well who really cares about them".
That's exactly the arrogant, sneering attitude that makes Brexiters more determined than ever to see this through.
''Boris Johnson news - live: Macron says UK faces 'historic vassalisation' in withering assessment of country's Brexit future ahead of PM's Paris trip''
This is why it's time for straight talking Steve when this is the future for millions living in the UK and if those voting for brexit don't appear to care why should anyone care about them?
There is still time for redemption but you have to take a deep breath and admit to yourself you were dudded, sold a pup.
I would have thought after all this time brexiteers would have a list a mile long about the great things ahead that brexit will bring.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-news-live-no-deal-macron-meeting-merkel-divorce-bill-a9074151.html
You're inspired by the things Macron says?
Yeah right; how are the yellow vests doing just now? Ready for the next round?
-
And all the time Farage is collecting statements from bozo so called leaders, then at the right time he will repeat them, get all the publicity and use them to stoke resentment in the British public.
Just sat back having a cup of tea ready to pounce , especially if it comes down to a general election.
It will be the end of the Labour party, the liberals will get the remain vote down south, but the power will be a coalition of the Tories and the Brexit party.
Farage to lead it? could be.
-
Meanwhile back here on Earth...
-
If there's an election in October/November, the Brexit party will struggle to get 5 seats. I'd put money on them getting zero.
-
Steve, your 'look over the there'' doesn't cut it, it's not about Macron it's about johnson and the UK.
The EU is in effect distributing funds across the UK better than our London centric governments have ever done to fund regional infrastructure. Do you expect the lot of the working poor to improve with brexit?
And your comment doesn't answer the basic questions that still stand, what do you want from from brexit and what will improve in the UK by it?
You don't appear to be able to answer these simple questions.
-
just 1 of the many Brexit details :
Jeremy CorbynVerified account @jeremycorbyn · 3h3 hours ago
British lamb is a billion pound industry - and 94% of its exports go to the EU.
It's just one of many British industries under severe threat from a No Deal Brexit.
-
The EU is in effect distributing funds across the UK better than our London centric governments have ever done to fund regional infrastructure. Do you expect the lot of the working poor to improve with brexit?
looks like the Brexiteers are planning to redistribute to the North
1. The IndependentVerified account @Independent 9m9 minutes ago
Rubbish from the south could be sent to the north under no-deal Brexit, industry insiders admit
-
just 1 of the many Brexit details :
Jeremy CorbynVerified account @jeremycorbyn · 3h3 hours ago
British lamb is a billion pound industry - and 94% of its exports go to the EU.
It's just one of many British industries under severe threat from a No Deal Brexit.
So why has Corbyn been against the EU all his life?
Talk about hypocrisy.
-
Sydney, you must have forgot about the Balklands war, and the Netherlands Army only last year being held responsible for standing by while thousands were murdered, or the Dutch airliner shot down a couple of years ago, no wars my arse.
-
Sydney, you must have forgot about the Balklands war, and the Netherlands Army only last year being held responsible for standing by while thousands were murdered, or the Dutch airliner shot down a couple of years ago, no wars my arse.
When did the Balkans Wars happen, and when did the Balkans countries join the EU..?
-
Sydney, you must have forgot about the Balklands war, and the Netherlands Army only last year being held responsible for standing by while thousands were murdered, or the Dutch airliner shot down a couple of years ago, no wars my arse.
You were saying about your arse Selby?
-
Also, what's this about a Dutch airliner being shot down? Looks like the dictators at the EUSSR are keeping quiet about that one.
-
just 1 of the many Brexit details :
Jeremy CorbynVerified account @jeremycorbyn · 3h3 hours ago
British lamb is a billion pound industry - and 94% of its exports go to the EU.
It's just one of many British industries under severe threat from a No Deal Brexit.
So why has Corbyn been against the EU all his life?
Talk about hypocrisy.
Not in its entirety.
-
So why has Corbyn been against the EU all his life?
Talk about hypocrisy.
Let's say that was 100% true; then why is he against no deal? Surely someone who has supported this is "whole life" would be all for it? The answer is he knows no deal would be a disaster, and even he can't stand to see his country go down the pan.
So the question is why is Boris Johnson, someone who had to write down the pros and cons of leaving before making his feelings public, so pro brexit all of a sudden?
Hint: it's to do with money and personal wealth
-
''No-deal Brexit would shrink UK's global influence, say ex-ambassadors
Former senior diplomats write to PM urging him to ‘signal a different approach’ at G7 summit''
''Johnson told reporters during a visit to Devon: “I’m afraid we will have to prepare to come out without an agreement and we can do that. We are very confident that we will be OK because we will have all sorts of preparations in place''
Sick bags and disposable nappies at the ready.
''https://www.independenceaustralia.com/info/health-tips/pads
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/24/no-deal-brexit-would-shrink-uk-global-influence-say-ex-ambassadors
-
Very confident we'll be OK? WE'LL BE O f**kING K? What happened to taking back control, countries lining up to give us great trade deals?
-
Aye. And a month ago it was 1,000,000/1 against No Deal according to the liar who now leads the country. Now it's touch and go.
And THAT is without a single second of negotiations.
-
Trump is promising BoJo a great trade deal...the best!
Here is what it means in Canada, where they secured a deal;
https://actions.sumofus.org/a/lone-pine-drop-usd250-million-lawsuit-against-canada-now
That won't happen here though, will it?
Not with us taking back control.
-
Here's the best summary I've read of where we currently are.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MatthewdAncona/status/1166065686394937344
We've got an utterly amoral, pathological liar as PM, being advised by the megalomaniac Cummings and they are driving us into the most horrific political crisis in many, many decades.
-
Spot the difference.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49482032
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY&t=26&feature=youtu.be
-
This is a fascinating insight into values in Brexit Britain.
https://mobile.twitter.com/shahmiruk/status/1166434723901693952
Sanni worked for the Leave campaign. He then turned whistleblower about how they had used Cambridge Analytica to illegal profile gullible voters and target their social media feed with lies.
The response from No 10 was to out him as gay.
Imagine the shite that caused him as a Muslim.
And the person who orchestrated that outing has just been recommended for a peerage.
f**k. Me.
-
Spot the difference.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49482032
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY&t=26&feature=youtu.be
It would be good to hear from from our brexit brains trust on this one to get an understanding of what they were thinking about brexit when they were hearing the loud and clear message that the UK would stay in a CU and being persuaded a Norway deal was a good deal to what is being rolled out now that no-deal is the best option. I'm thinking I'd want my money back if I'd bought into the former and got the latter bst.
-
No Deal the only acceptable Brexit, according to Farridge. Definitely what he was saying in 2016, yep. No need to fact check him on that one, guys! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49482032
-
Macho.
Here you go.
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html
The official Vote Leave position in 2016. That's Vote Leave headed by...errr....Oh yeah! Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings.
Look at the slideshow on that page.
Two things jump out to me.
1) On the 11th slide they say (their OWN f**kING WORDS!) "Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden step - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave."
2) Even better. Page 8. They say (their OWN f**kING WORDS) "We need to be able to hold our lawmakers to account".
Deception the whole f**king way. Topped off by a coup this morning.
I want to hear from a Brexit supporter how those claims match with where we are now, today.
-
You won't
-
For balance BST - the legislation was voted through parliament under a PM who voted and campaigned for remain.....
Vote leave are not the government, they can't be held to account for decisions made afterwards as they aren't solely their decisions.
Farage is a different matter...
-
BFYP
Vote Leave was run by Cummings and Johnson. Those were THEIR words.
Farage is nothing to do with this. He peddled his racist filth and lies through Leave.EU.
-
You won't
We don't need to.
-
can't
-
Is that it SS?
It's just a game where you can pull any stunt as long as you win and get away with it.
Is that it with you? No need to face up to lies and deception. We won, suck it up. Is that it?
-
Is that it SS?
It's just a game where you can pull any stunt as long as you win and get away with it.
Is that it with you? No need to face up to lies and deception. We won, suck it up. Is that it?
Billy, you know my opinion about politicians. As a kid, I always loved the circus, and my favourites were the clowns. Well I've got a ringside seat now, and there's 650 f*cking clowns. Can't go wrong can I?
-
SS
Then you have zero respect for the democratic system that underpins this country.
Don't EVER claim to be a democrat again. You're justifying absolute power for 1 person. Be man enough to admit that's what you're doing.
-
SS
Then you have zero respect for the democratic system that underpins this country.
Don't EVER claim to be a democrat again. You're justifying absolute power for 1 person. Be man enough to admit that's what you're doing.
I've never claimed to be anything on here. I leave that to people who know me. Nor have I justified anything anybody does in modern politics.
However, if YOU'RE claiming to be a democrat, then justify 17.4 million people being told to f*ck off.
-
Is that it SS?
It's just a game where you can pull any stunt as long as you win and get away with it.
Is that it with you? No need to face up to lies and deception. We won, suck it up. Is that it?
Billy, you know my opinion about politicians. As a kid, I always loved the circus, and my favourites were the clowns. Well I've got a ringside seat now, and there's 650 f*cking clowns. Can't go wrong can I?
Future Mrs Wilts Rover's middle daughter used to work in circus. It went bust in the middle of a tour and she (and everyone else) lost all her wages and had a make her own way home from the middle of France.
Motto - them clowns are not always funny or to be trusted...and what are you going to do when the circus is over?
-
Is that it SS?
It's just a game where you can pull any stunt as long as you win and get away with it.
Is that it with you? No need to face up to lies and deception. We won, suck it up. Is that it?
Billy, you know my opinion about politicians. As a kid, I always loved the circus, and my favourites were the clowns. Well I've got a ringside seat now, and there's 650 f*cking clowns. Can't go wrong can I?
Future Mrs Wilts Rover's middle daughter used to work in circus. It went bust in the middle of a tour and she (and everyone else) lost all her wages and had a make her own way home from the middle of France.
Motto - them clowns are not always funny or to be trusted...and what are you going to do when the circus is over?
To be honest Wilts, it was over a long time ago for me, along with lots of other things. I've still got the Rovers though.
-
Go on SS. Tell me where I've ever told Leavers to f**k off.
I've said for 2 years now that we need a second referendum,not because I didn't like the result of the first. Because the first was a sham.
It was a sham, firstly because it was a binary choice on a non-binary question. It was a sham secondly because of the extent of law breaking on the Leave side. And it was a sham thirdly because we now know that a the entire Leave case was based on deception.
How does asking for a Referendum make someone anti-democratic?
-
Is that it SS?
It's just a game where you can pull any stunt as long as you win and get away with it.
Is that it with you? No need to face up to lies and deception. We won, suck it up. Is that it?
Billy, you know my opinion about politicians. As a kid, I always loved the circus, and my favourites were the clowns. Well I've got a ringside seat now, and there's 650 f*cking clowns. Can't go wrong can I?
Future Mrs Wilts Rover's middle daughter used to work in circus. It went bust in the middle of a tour and she (and everyone else) lost all her wages and had a make her own way home from the middle of France.
Motto - them clowns are not always funny or to be trusted...and what are you going to do when the circus is over?
I'd go straight for the Juggler.
-
Go on SS. Tell me where I've ever told Leavers to f**k off.
I've said for 2 years now that we need a second referendum,not because I didn't like the result of the first. Because the first was a sham.
It was a sham, firstly because it was a binary choice on a non-binary question. It was a sham secondly because of the extent of law breaking on the Leave side. And it was a sham thirdly because we now know that a the entire Leave case was based on deception.
How does asking for a Referendum make someone anti-democratic?
I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about Parliament, who swore to uphold the Referendum result, and reneged.
That's why I no longer have any respect for British politics.
-
SS
Who brought down May's deal?
Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Raab, Patel and the rest of the Tory right.
If they'd voted for May's deal, we'd have been out in March.
Now that lot are running the country.
-
Hi BB, while you are here why don't you tell us what you want from brexit and how it will improve the country, you appear to want to be the smart cookie, no-one else can.
-
I want to be the smart cookie? That, coming from you really does take the biscuit.
-
I want to be the smart cookie? That, coming from you really does take the biscuit.
But still no answer
Time period 2070, britain a poor isolated country and reduced to being the rump of Europe. Dad, dad, why did we allow the rich people to take over parliament and leave the EU all those years ago, be quiet and eat your chlorinated chicken, no one seems to know it's like a lot of the people were mesmerised couldn't control their own brains and make rational decisions, some blamed the russians, I guess we'll never know for sure.
-
If I pretended to have all the answers and the ability to read the future I'd be as guilty as what I accuse you of being. THAT is the whole point!
-
The real point is BB you don't even know what you want and you can't tell us in what way the country will be better with brexit can you? so you don't really have any answers just a blind faith in a process that has cost the country the better part of 100bn to date and caused the country to split down the middle.
-
Fred: "I'm going to win the football pools next week".
George: "You don't know that for sure"
Fred: "I do. Gary Lineker gave 8 score draws in the Guardian"
George: "Gary Lineker, despite his great knowledge of football, has no more ability to win the football pools than I have".
Fred: "OK then, YOU give me 8 winning numbers for next week, smart arse!"
-
''Football match-fixing: six arrested by police investigating betting syndicate as rigging hits British game
Telegraph exclusive: members of an alleged betting syndicate are arrested on suspicion of fixing football games in the biggest match-rigging scandal for decades''
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/10479667/Football-match-fixing-six-arrested-by-police-investigating-betting-syndicate-as-rigging-hits-British-game.html
-
Hi BB, while you are here why don't you tell us what you want from brexit and how it will improve the country, you appear to want to be the smart cookie, no-one else can.
Well BB originally voted to remain but now wants to Leave because it would be democratic... Wonder if he still thinks it is.
-
''Football match-fixing: six arrested by police investigating betting syndicate as rigging hits British game
Telegraph exclusive: members of an alleged betting syndicate are arrested on suspicion of fixing football games in the biggest match-rigging scandal for decades''
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/10479667/Football-match-fixing-six-arrested-by-police-investigating-betting-syndicate-as-rigging-hits-British-game.html
Is that not unlike sabotaging Brexit and then betting that it won't happen?
-
Hi BB, while you are here why don't you tell us what you want from brexit and how it will improve the country, you appear to want to be the smart cookie, no-one else can.
Well BB originally voted to remain but now wants to Leave because it would be democratic... Wonder if he still thinks it is.
Yes
-
Hi BB, while you are here why don't you tell us what you want from brexit and how it will improve the country, you appear to want to be the smart cookie, no-one else can.
Well BB originally voted to remain but now wants to Leave because it would be democratic... Wonder if he still thinks it is.
Yes
Hahahahahaahaha.
-
''Football match-fixing: six arrested by police investigating betting syndicate as rigging hits British game
Telegraph exclusive: members of an alleged betting syndicate are arrested on suspicion of fixing football games in the biggest match-rigging scandal for decades''
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/10479667/Football-match-fixing-six-arrested-by-police-investigating-betting-syndicate-as-rigging-hits-British-game.html
Is that not unlike sabotaging Brexit and then betting that it won't happen?
The problem is BB, the team you support sabotaged brexit and failed to get it up over 3 years and in all that time and all the time leading up to the vote in 2016 you still can't tell us what you want from it and how it will improve life for those living in the UK.
And now you have your blind faith in a liar, cheat and casual racist and someone that wants to achieve what he wants by abuse of process. Well that's democracy by brexiteers for you.
Added: my suspicion is you won't put pen to paper and tell us because you can't think of anything that will improve and you know deep down over time you'll be proven wrong so rather than face up to this you say nothing.
-
You see Sydney, that's all well and good if that's what you believe. But it is only really all well and good if what you believe is true!
That, my friend, is the problem!
-
You see Sydney, that's all well and good if that's what you believe. But it is only really all well and good if what you believe is true!
That, my friend, is the problem!
And you continue to say nothing at all.
mod: you lack the courage of your convictions
-
Sydney. Do you ever actually read my posts, or are you a bit hard of thinking?
-
Sydney. Do you ever actually read my posts, or are you a bit hard of thinking?
When you actually say something I will
-
How do you know what I'm saying if you don't read them?
-
How do you know what I'm saying if you don't read them?
Let's start with something fairly simple and work up. If we leave with no-deal and the EU puts a tariff on our goods and our imports from the EU are more expensive, do you think this will be A/ better or B/ worse for the UK? If we do a trade deal with the US where they have a lower floor on wages and Trump want access to our NHS do you think we will have to reduce wages and conditions to compete? Do you think that a trade deals with India/Mexico/South America will help our steel industry?
Or to make it even simpler, you've had more than 3 years to think about it remember, what do you personally want from brexit and how will it improve anything at all?
You can phone a friend I'm sure Steve will be able to help.
-
I don't imagine many people actually want to leave with no deal. However, without the threat of leaving with no deal how the f**k can we get the best deal? If, at the end of the day we are going to agree to a deal anyway, why on god's earth would they offer us a good deal?
-
Madame Toes and me are going on the anti Brexit London march on October 19th. (Buses from Meadowhell £25 at 7am if anyone's interested)
We're also doing the anti prorogue march in Donny town centre this Satdy at 12 (now that the Bury game is off)
Both these events might might make no difference but at least I'll feel I've done something/anything rather than just sit here and accept the crock of ordure this and Cameron's government has thrown at us.
-
BB
For the fiftieth time.
How in the name of holy f**k does "Give me what I want or I'll blow my kneecaps off" work as a negotiating strategy?
-
And how do you determine that calling for a public vote on an issue as being anti-democratic, while closing down Parliament to prevent a vote on the same issue, and hence force through an outcome that there has NEVER been a majority for as acceptable?
-
BST, you really never give up, do you? I'm simply supplying an actual fact, of which you (as usual) haven't answered, but instead responded with another silly statement of your own thoughts, that says more about the state of your mind that actual reality.
-
Right. You've woken up in one of THOSE moods today have you?
-
We all have different levels of bullshit tolerance. Mine soon reaches its limit when I re-visit this thread.
-
I don't imagine many people actually want to leave with no deal. However, without the threat of leaving with no deal how the f**k can we get the best deal? If, at the end of the day we are going to agree to a deal anyway, why on god's earth would they offer us a good deal?
Oh right. I remember David Davies saying on Question Time that the EU would give us a good deal at the last minute, that's how these things work.
Well they didn't.
And they've made it quite clear they ain't going to now despite Boris getting his sixshooter out like John f**king Wayne.
The best we can hope for is agreeing something very like Teresa May's deal which Boris consistently voted against.
-
What do you mean they didn't? We haven't reached the last minute yet!
-
It's like a f**king drug isn't it, this Leave thing.
Millions of people, their brains turned to sludge, repeating this shit in low voices about how we need to bully the EU into offering us a deal.
And never, EVER having a f**king clue as to what sort of things they want in a deal, why the deal the EU actual DID give us is unacceptable, and why that previous deal is the red line beyond which the EU cannot move.
You explain these things over and o er again, then the next day it's back to half-sentient grunts of "EU...Got to bully the EU into deal."
Pitiful. Grown adults just switching off their brains.
-
What do you mean they didn't? We haven't reached the last minute yet!
Very good BB!
It depends which last minute you're talking about.
They gave us the terms ages ago when we were supposed to leave and they haven't changed. They cannot change its simple. To do so would undermine what the EU is all about.
-
Leave it TT.
BB's never interested in actually discussing this. He refuses to talk about anything that might happen in the future (because you can't predict the future) then refuses to discuss any previous predictions that have been shown to be correct, because you can't prove that it happened because of why you said it was going to happen.
I picture him as one of those ancient Stoic philosophers, living in a barrel on top of a ten foot high pole, trying to block out the entire world of information around them.
-
Tommy. If I no longer wanted to belong to an establishment and they told me I could only leave on their terms I'd tell them to f**k off.
-
Tommy. If I no longer wanted to belong to an establishment and they told me I could only leave on their terms I'd tell them to f**k off.
OK. So we've got to the bottom of it then. You want to leave with no deal.
-
Leave it TT.
BB's never interested in actually discussing this. He refuses to talk about anything that might happen in the future (because you can't predict the future) then refuses to discuss any previous predictions that have been shown to be correct, because you can't prove that it happened because of why you said it was going to happen.
I picture him as one of those ancient Stoic philosophers, living in a barrel on top of a ten foot high pole, trying to block out the entire world of information around them.
BST, the problem there is this 'world of information' includes people of ridiculous political bias preaching one-sided bullshit.
-
Tommy. If I no longer wanted to belong to an establishment and they told me I could only leave on their terms I'd tell them to f**k off.
OK. So we've got to the bottom of it then. You want to leave with no deal.
Of course I don't! But in the event of only being allowed to leave on their terms the only alternative would be to join the Britain Surrendering Together Party!
.......And if we did, how do you think the EU would treat us?
-
No differently to how they are treating us now.
-
BB
You're back to doing that pretending to be stupid thing again.
The EU is NOT saying we're only allowed to leave on their terms. It's utterly stupid to say that.
We can leave whenever we want. There is nothing the EU could do to stop us.
The issue is, do we want a grown up relationship with the EU after we have left. The EU has said, consistently, that in order to start discussions about our future trading relationship with them, we must first come to an agreement on three critical things.
1) The money we owe for things we have contractually agreed to with the EU.
2) The legal status of EU citizens in the UK and vice versa.
3) The Irish border.
The EU has bent over backwards to accommodate the UK on the third point (which was always an impossible issue to solve, despite Johnson waving it away as nothing in 2016).
If we're not interested in sorting those out, we can leave, but on terms that will be massively detrimental to our economy.
That is and always has been the choice.
By making out that the EU is stopping us from leaving or being deliberately obstructive, you are acting like a child having a tantrum.
-
Of course, if you DIDN'T want to act like a kid in this discussion, you could tell us what you don't like about the deal we had with the EU, and what better deal would satisfy you.
Or you can keep going round this hamster wheel of chucking up the same complaints and ignoring any explanations. Your choice.
-
Billy boy. I 'chuck up' the same 'complaints' because you haven't answered any of them yet!
-
Like I say, you got up in one of THOSE moods. It's embarrassing to be honest.
-
Stop playing to the gallery and address the issues, man.
-
Go fund some other leg to hump BB. You're an embarrassment.
-
Meanwhile, here's my embarrassment. I've poured out thousands of words in hundreds of posts trying to sum up the way the Brexit process has been hijacked.
Here's a professional, nailing it in less than 240 characters.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RCorbettMEP/status/1166968637107970049?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Every word correct. The entire situation summed up beautifully.
-
I prefer Facebook me'sen. In fact, I'm considered a bit of a 'Face' on Facebook.
Billy, are you considered similarly on Twitter?
-
Ho ho f**king ho. They're rolling in the aisles.
-
I'm here all week.
-
Yeah. I was worried you might be. Can we ask the Queen to prorogue you?
-
She could do us both together- I'd be the Pro, you'd be the Rogue.
-
Well I assumed someone must be paying you to get f**ked on a daily basis.
-
Alas no, my gigolo days are sadly over.
-
I prefer Facebook me'sen. In fact, I'm considered a bit of a 'Face' on Facebook.
Billy, are you considered similarly on Twitter?
Sounds about right. You do seem like one of Cummings puppets.
-
BB - I've ask you and others this before, but I must have missed your answer.
Whilst you're here though, what changes are you most looking forward to post-brexit and what improvements in our lives can we all expect to see?
-
For a start I'd like to have an Australian style immigration control, and where Europeans don't get preference over the rest of the world just because they're Europeans.
-
For a start I'd like to have an Australian style immigration control, and where Europeans don't get preference over the rest of the world just because they're Europeans.
So you support a system where people can only stay here if they can pay their way and will be a net contributor to our public services rather than a burden? Do I have that right?
-
And you accept that the consequence of that will be much less access to the EU Single Market? Because these things don't get decided in isolation.
-
I would support a system where citizens of every country have the same rights to live in this country as Europeans, based on an Australian style points-based system.
-
And you accept the consequences that we'd have drastically reduced access to the Single Market and the severely negative effect that would have on our economy?
-
Yes. I find a hint of racism in not treating people of all countries equally.
-
It really IS just a game for you isn't it?
-
Don't you find a hint of racism in not treating people of all countries equally?
-
Don't you find a hint of racism in not treating people of all countries equally?
In that case everybody should be treated in the same way as the British.
-
What?
-
No of course I don't BB. It's idiotic to call "racist" a policy that is fundamentally about an agreed economic free trade area.
You're just looking for stupid things to argue about. Have you ever thought of taking up a hobby?
-
Welcome back Bentley Bullshit, we've missed your lame attempts at spoiling debate. I see your luxury holiday to Tollbar hasn't done anything to sharpen up your wit.
-
For a start I'd like to have an Australian style immigration control, and where Europeans don't get preference over the rest of the world just because they're Europeans.
As you have pointed out many times we don't yet know what will happen after Brexit because we haven't 'Brexited' yet. We can however make a guess going by what has been made public so far.
For instance India have said that as a condition for granting a trade deal with the UK they want more visas for Indian citizens to work in the UK. So even with this Australian style points system - Indians will have preference because they are Indians.
The big difference between that and the current system of course being that whilst UK citizens have the same rights as other European citizens to live and work anywhere in Europe this wont be case with India.
So what you want and what you are likely to get may be somewhat different. Thems' the trade offs in trade deals.
-
Welcome back Bentley Bullshit, we've missed your lame attempts at spoiling debate. I see your luxury holiday to Tollbar hasn't done anything to sharpen up your wit.
Way hay! Nice one Mr Pastry. I'm sure Billy will be well proud of you for your classy offer of support to his cause. You should be very proud.
-
Aaaannnddd cue the "Disciples" stage of a BB argument.
You DO know that the idea of Groundhog Day was that Bill Murray sorted out the balls ups he'd made the previous time. He didn't just keep repeating them.
-
I would support a system where citizens of every country have the same rights to live in this country as Europeans, based on an Australian style points-based system.
Most immigrants come from outside Europe, so it seems to me like they have those rights already.
-
''A Scottish judge has retired to consider a legal attempt to block the suspension of the UK Parliament.
Lord Doherty heard arguments from representatives of a cross-party group seeking an interim interdict that would halt the move by the government.
Arguing for the UK government, Roddy Dunlop QC said the issue "was not a matter for the courts".
The judge will return to give his decision at 10:00 on Friday.
The group of 75 parliamentarians are seeking the Scottish legal equivalent of an injunction to stop parliament being suspended, pending a full hearing on 6 September''
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49509712
It would be quite amusing if one of those foreigners made a decision that thwarted guido johnson.
-
The main thing is ensuring that they operate within the law, if they've done that, which they likely have then there cannot be too many complaints IMO.
-
BYFP - what are you looking forward to most post brexit?
-
The main thing is ensuring that they operate within the law, if they've done that, which they likely have then there cannot be too many complaints IMO.
So lawful 10/10 moral 0/10 OK?
-
BYFP - what are you looking forward to most post brexit?
Dont know about BFYP but I will look forward to a representative Election / Voting process for the UK or England if the big split comes
Also I will look forward to a "movement" that will look to take us back into the EU at the earliest possible opportunity
-
The main thing is ensuring that they operate within the law, if they've done that, which they likely have then there cannot be too many complaints IMO.
So if we could pass a law to declare the Conservative Party a proscribed organisation and then jailed all the members you'd be OK with that bfyp?
-
BYFP - what are you looking forward to most post brexit?
Dont know about BFYP but I will look forward to a representative Election / Voting process for the UK or England if the big split comes
Also I will look forward to a "movement" that will look to take us back into the EU at the earliest possible opportunity
And how would you feel if Parliament did everything in its power to overturn the result of election/voting process Wolf?
-
BYFP - what are you looking forward to most post brexit?
The realisation that it is nowhere near as horrific as some people are making out. I am massively against no deal brexit make no mistake on that as much as I am also against the other extreme of stating it's a bit too hard, the people are thick let's ignore them.
The current uncertainty is more damaging than being in or out in the first place and whether you agree or not, the referendum should be honoured and we should have been out by now had the May government not have failed to deliver it. The reality is parliament doesnt really want brexit and will do whatever it can to stop it.
-
The main thing is ensuring that they operate within the law, if they've done that, which they likely have then there cannot be too many complaints IMO.
So if we could pass a law to declare the Conservative Party a proscribed organisation and then jailed all the members you'd be OK with that bfyp?
Well that's a ludicrous comparison isn't it based upon today's position because its wholly unjustified. But based upon that point is it right to make extremism illegal, yes it is. Our main parties are not of that persuasion thankfully whether you disagree with them or not.
The laws in question on parliament are how old? Also read my prior posts, I think it's a bad move from the government, but that doesnt mean they lack the power and legality to do it as far as I can see.
-
As long as it's law forget the moral situation, is that what you are saying?
-
Aaaannnddd cue the "Disciples" stage of a BB argument.
You DO know that the idea of Groundhog Day was that Bill Murray sorted out the balls ups he'd made the previous time. He didn't just keep repeating them.
Did it all end in Tears for him also?
Must be a Billy thing.
-
I would support a system where citizens of every country have the same rights to live in this country as Europeans, based on an Australian style points-based system.
Most immigrants come from outside Europe, so it seems to me like they have those rights already.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/eu-migration-to-and-from-the-uk/
-
''A Scottish judge has retired to consider a legal attempt to block the suspension of the UK Parliament.
Lord Doherty heard arguments from representatives of a cross-party group seeking an interim interdict that would halt the move by the government.
Arguing for the UK government, Roddy Dunlop QC said the issue "was not a matter for the courts".
The judge will return to give his decision at 10:00 on Friday.
The group of 75 parliamentarians are seeking the Scottish legal equivalent of an injunction to stop parliament being suspended, pending a full hearing on 6 September''
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49509712
It would be quite amusing if one of those foreigners made a decision that thwarted guido johnson.
Your lot have lost; yet again.
-
I would support a system where citizens of every country have the same rights to live in this country as Europeans, based on an Australian style points-based system.
Most immigrants come from outside Europe, so it seems to me like they have those rights already.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/eu-migration-to-and-from-the-uk/
Sorry BB - what is it you are trying to say with this link - because all it does is prove Macho is correct? Most migrants in the UK are from outside the EU and thus the government has full control of whether they can come into the country or not.
-
Wilts. Are you deliberately missing the point or just plain trying to deceive people into believing you've got a point?
NON-EU MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EU MEMBERS.
The government DOES have full control of whether none-EU members can come here but NOT full control of EU members.
-
Wilts. Are you deliberately missing the point or just plain trying to deceive people into believing you've got a point?
NON-EU MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EU MEMBERS.
The government DOES have full control of whether none-EU members can come here but NOT full control of EU members.
Hence my confusion at the link to the article you posted - which interesting as it is - does not discuss comparable rights of EU and non-EU citizens.
What it says is: here are countries EU citizens come from, this is why they come, this is what they are entitled to, there has been a fall since the referendum - and by the way more people come to the UK from outside the EU anyway.
So again what is the point of that article in relation to Macho's point that most migrants come from outside Europe?
-
Johnson believes that the only way to get a 'good' deal is not to take No Deal off the table because the EU don't want No Deal.
Well if that is so they are bluffing it very well. Yesterday Michael Gove went to watch the first day of a MONTH of No Deal rehearsal preparations in Calais.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/30/gove-watches-no-deal-brexit-practice-run-in-port-of-calais
-
Yes but Johnson doesn't believe anything if the sort does he.
No one who stops to think about this for a moment believes that No Deal is a credible threat. You don't win negotiations by threatening to shoot yourself if you don't get what you want.
No one believes that the UK will willingly take the path of No Deal.
What Johnson wants, f**king Kitson that he is, is for the responsibility for stopping No Deal to hang on Parliament.
Then, at the resulting General Election, he'll paint himself as the frustrated champion of Brexit, who WOULD have taken us out with No Deal if the t**ts in Parliament hadn't stopped him.
Anyone who falls for this is giving up on the ability to think.
-
Wilts. Are you deliberately missing the point or just plain trying to deceive people into believing you've got a point?
NON-EU MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EU MEMBERS.
The government DOES have full control of whether none-EU members can come here but NOT full control of EU members.
Hence my confusion at the link to the article you posted - which interesting as it is - does not discuss comparable rights of EU and non-EU citizens.
What it says is: here are countries EU citizens come from, this is why they come, this is what they are entitled to, there has been a fall since the referendum - and by the way more people come to the UK from outside the EU anyway.
So again what is the point of that article in relation to Macho's point that most migrants come from outside Europe?
The VERY FIRST paragraph in understanding the evidence.
"EU citizens are a key group in UK immigration policy as they currently enjoy free movement within the European Union and the government cannot limit their rights to live and work in the UK in the same way that it does for non-EU nationals"
-
Yes BB.
Thank you for hammering home the bleeding obvious.
That's the sort of thing that happens when you strike trading deals and arrangements.
India has already said that if we want a post Brexit trade deal the price will include easing of work visas for Indians coming to Britain.
Presumably, by your "What can I have a childish row about today" logic, that would be racist too.
-
So why didn't you correct MachoMadness then? Why didn't you correct Mr Wilts then? Keeping the Britain Surrendering Together members under your wing, are we?
-
BYFP - what are you looking forward to most post brexit?
Dont know about BFYP but I will look forward to a representative Election / Voting process for the UK or England if the big split comes
Also I will look forward to a "movement" that will look to take us back into the EU at the earliest possible opportunity
And how would you feel if Parliament did everything in its power to overturn the result of election/voting process Wolf?
Unsure about what your question is asking but I will try to put my post a different way
My original bit is saying nothing new - I am a fan of Proportional Representation and I hope that if we leave the EU and there is a massive falling out of the Electorate with Parliament that PR emerges which should (I would hope) put an end to extremism either way
The second bit is me saying that if we are taken out of the EU (however it is done) I expect new Parties will emerge / maybe some current Parties may merge and there will be a move by them to take us back into the EU
Dont forget (you cant as I post this often) that the 1975 Referendum was a massive 67 - 33 to Remain in the EU and people got on with their lives EXCEPT for a hard core of a few (mainly) Tory MPs but they have managed over the years to finally get a Referendum in which just over 50% of those Voting - voted Leave
So think what a base of almost 50% of those opposed to Leaving might achieve if they had a vehicle (Political Party or movement) to get behind - to get the UK (or England if the Union splits) back into the EU. I reckon it would not take 44 years
Hope I have answered your question. I AM believe it or not trying to stay out of all EU debates lol and having been on the losing side in 75 and 16 I hope I get another go before I peg it
-
Javid says that even though you sacked my advisor without telling me and are running my portfolio from a pirate ship on the thames and made me look like a complete chump "I still love you guido johnson"
-
Oh no not porkies again?
"A myth has been propagated by Brexiteers. There is a single “British fishing industry” which will benefit from reclaiming the “60/70/80% of British fish” caught by EU boats.
No, there isn’t. There are competing interests. English v Scottish; deep-sea fishing v inshore fishing; industrial v family-scale boats; fishers v processors. Some of the most vibrant, locally important and ecologically respectful parts of the UK industry have nothing to gain and everything to lose from Brexit.
They depend on shellfish, lobsters, crabs and langoustines (crayfish) that are quota-free or are overwhelmingly allocated to the UK. More than 80% is sold to the continent (mostly Spain and France). This trade has grown large because of the border-free EU single market''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/31/myth-brexit-bonanza-uk-fishing-exposed-no-deal
-
Wilts. Are you deliberately missing the point or just plain trying to deceive people into believing you've got a point?
NON-EU MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EU MEMBERS.
The government DOES have full control of whether none-EU members can come here but NOT full control of EU members.
Hence my confusion at the link to the article you posted - which interesting as it is - does not discuss comparable rights of EU and non-EU citizens.
What it says is: here are countries EU citizens come from, this is why they come, this is what they are entitled to, there has been a fall since the referendum - and by the way more people come to the UK from outside the EU anyway.
So again what is the point of that article in relation to Macho's point that most migrants come from outside Europe?
The VERY FIRST paragraph in understanding the evidence.
"EU citizens are a key group in UK immigration policy as they currently enjoy free movement within the European Union and the government cannot limit their rights to live and work in the UK in the same way that it does for non-EU nationals"
That's not evidence! Of anything. It's a statement.
And don't go accusing me of requiring correcting when all I am doing is asking you why you have put up a pointless link.
It's up to you to explain this new Australian points system that you are looking forward too - not me.
-
Yes BB.
Thank you for hammering home the bleeding obvious.
That's the sort of thing that happens when you strike trading deals and arrangements.
India has already said that if we want a post Brexit trade deal the price will include easing of work visas for Indians coming to Britain.
Presumably, by your "What can I have a childish row about today" logic, that would be racist too.
Yes I mentioned that in a post on the previous page and he ignored it. Just like he is going to ignore you saying it.
-
What is there to ignore? As long as we don't get undesirables from India I've no problem with them coming here.
-
Wilts. Are you deliberately missing the point or just plain trying to deceive people into believing you've got a point?
NON-EU MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EU MEMBERS.
The government DOES have full control of whether none-EU members can come here but NOT full control of EU members.
Hence my confusion at the link to the article you posted - which interesting as it is - does not discuss comparable rights of EU and non-EU citizens.
What it says is: here are countries EU citizens come from, this is why they come, this is what they are entitled to, there has been a fall since the referendum - and by the way more people come to the UK from outside the EU anyway.
So again what is the point of that article in relation to Macho's point that most migrants come from outside Europe?
The VERY FIRST paragraph in understanding the evidence.
"EU citizens are a key group in UK immigration policy as they currently enjoy free movement within the European Union and the government cannot limit their rights to live and work in the UK in the same way that it does for non-EU nationals"
That's not evidence! Of anything. It's a statement.
And don't go accusing me of requiring correcting when all I am doing is asking you why you have put up a pointless link.
It's up to you to explain this new Australian points system that you are looking forward too - not me.
Mr Wilts, it shows evidence that EU nationals get more right of entry into the UK than Non-EU nationals. Is that not true?
Why the f**k should I have to explain the Australia points system to you?
Seeing as I'm that kind of guy you can read this if you like.
https://workpermit.com/immigration/australia/australian-skilled-immigration-points-requirements
-
gall: meaning
bold and impudent behaviour.
"the bank had the gall to demand a fee"
synonyms: impudence, insolence, impertinence, cheek, cheekiness, nerve, audacity, brazenness, effrontery, temerity, presumption, presumptuousness, brashness, shamelessness, pertness, boldness; More
-
It's amazing how patient Ireland has been with the boris blunderbus' approach.
''Ireland has said it cannot agree to Boris Johnson’s demands just for his “political convenience”, giving the lie to fresh claims that the EU was about to compromise on the Irish border backstop''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/01/ireland-says-it-will-not-act-for-boris-johnsons-political-convenience
-
So why didn't you correct MachoMadness then? Why didn't you correct Mr Wilts then? Keeping the Britain Surrendering Together members under your wing, are we?
Because neither of us are wrong? EU nationals can stay here for up to 3 months while they look for work. After that time, if they don't have a job or enough money to pay their own way, we can kick them out. This is more rights than, say, Indians would get, who can simply be denied entry. Thats the small price we pay for access to this single market... but in practice it doesn't matter that much. Why? Because, despite what your mate Farridge says, most foreigners don't come here to sponge off the state. It doesn't matter where they're from.
Anyway, you'll forgive me for not buying the argument that Brexit is about giving more rights to Indian families to come here. Farages breaking point poster put paid to that idea.
-
So EU nationals get more rights than non-EU nationals?
That's what I said!
-
It's amazing how patient Ireland has been with the boris blunderbus' approach.
''Ireland has said it cannot agree to Boris Johnson’s demands just for his “political convenience”, giving the lie to fresh claims that the EU was about to compromise on the Irish border backstop''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/01/ireland-says-it-will-not-act-for-boris-johnsons-political-convenience
they have to be patient as let’s be honest a no deal will will probably bankrupt Ireland,without the other eu countries bailing them out
-
So EU nationals get more rights than non-EU nationals?
That's what I said!
Marginally more right to ENTER the country, yes. More rights to stay and live here - which is what immigration is - no.
-
So EU nationals get more rights than non-EU nationals?
That's what I said!
In Scotland they sometimes get more rights than UK nationals!
-
So EU nationals get more rights than non-EU nationals?
That's what I said!
In Scotland they sometimes get more rights than UK nationals!
Any examples/evidence?
-
So EU nationals get more rights than non-EU nationals?
That's what I said!
In Scotland they sometimes get more rights than UK nationals!
Any examples/evidence?
Student fees is a prime example!
-
It's amazing how patient Ireland has been with the boris blunderbus' approach.
''Ireland has said it cannot agree to Boris Johnson’s demands just for his “political convenience”, giving the lie to fresh claims that the EU was about to compromise on the Irish border backstop''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/01/ireland-says-it-will-not-act-for-boris-johnsons-political-convenience
they have to be patient as let’s be honest a no deal will will probably bankrupt Ireland,without the other eu countries bailing them out
Ireland will have the support of 26 other EU countries if and when the ERG drag the UK out.
-
this is what the lying tw@t said:
Boris Johnson says when he became PM he said he would not wait before making changes.
That is why he has made a series of policy announcements, he says.
It is to push forward these measures that he needs a Queen’s Speech.
He says he has been encouraged by the progress being made towards a Brexit deal.
He says there are three reasons why it has become more likely.
The EU can see the UK wants a deal, he says.
It can see the UK has a vision for Brexit.
And it can see the UK is preparing for no-deal.
He says MPs will chop the legs off his negotiating position if they vote tomorrow to rule out no-deal.
He says there are no circumstances in which he will delay Brexit.
Armed with this conviction, he believes he will get a deal at the EU summit in October, he says.
He says negotiators should be allowed to get on with their work - without an election.
I don’t want an election and you don’t want one either, he says.
And that’s it.
-
Aye, he must be the most unpopular Prime Minister since.............., well, going all the way back to.............. Theresa May!
Our country's saviour Corbyn will sort it when he walks the next GE!
-
boris is a sociopath
-
This will be interesting when it is released tomorrow, unfortunately it will mean dealing with reality.
''At the UK in a Changing Europe, we have tried to address this: our report on it is out on Wednesday. We don’t have any inside information. We’re not privy to material that others do not have. But we do have a team of scholars who have spent their careers studying the relationship between the UK and the EU, and so are well placed to consider the potential implications if the UK were to leave in this manner''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/03/no-deal-brexit-crashing-out-uk-europe#comment-132639787
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/
-
Here's a thought.
The pound is today trading at the lowest rate against the dollar since 1985. $1.20 to the pound.
It picked up after 1985 and for the next 30 years it bounced between $1.50-2.00.
After the Ref was called in 2016, it started sliding and fell massively after the Ref result. It's never once been above $1.50 since the Ref was called.
That means that, apart from the fact that we've had a massive slow down economically since the Ref vote, that's left us £100bn+ poorer than we should have been in POUND terms, the value of what we do produce and earn and own is 20% less in world terms than it was before this whole f**king shambles started.
Sensible economists warned this would happen. Brexit campaigners called it Project Fear.
Those same sensible economists are telling us now that the consequence of No Deal would make that look like a minor blip. I've just heard a Tory No Deal advocate on the radio telling us that is Project Fear.
Who do you believe?
-
Daily Telegraph: johnson may expel Hammond from the party, yeh that's really likely just when he needs every body he can get he would make a move that would piss the rebels off even further.
''Boris Johnson could use 'nuclear option' of expelling Philip Hammond if he rebels in tonight’s crucial vote''
-
1. Professor Ian Donald @iandonald_psych
@DominicRaab @michaelgove @BorisJohnson
you have said you are making progress. How do you explain the EU saying you aren’t even try-ing? You are lying to the British public. You did it during the referendum, you are doing it now.
-
Brexit: Tory MP defects to Lib Dems, majority gone.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/sep/03/commons-showdown-looms-in-battle-over-no-deal-brexit-live
The Tory Phillip Lee has just issued this statement about his defection to the Lib Dems.
Over 27 years ago I joined the Conservative & Unionist party led by Sir John Major. Since 2010 I have had the privilege of representing the Bracknell Constituency. The party I joined in 1992 is not the party I am leaving today.
This Conservative government is aggressively pursuing a damaging Brexit in unprincipled ways. It is putting lives and livelihoods at risk unnecessarily and it is wantonly endangering the integrity of the United Kingdom. More widely, it is undermining our country’s economy, democracy and role in the world. It is using political manipulation, bullying and lies. And it is doing these things in a deliberate and considered way.
That is why today I am joining Jo Swinson and the Liberal Democrats. I believe the Liberal Democrats are best placed to build the unifying and inspiring political force needed to heal our divisions, unleash our talents, equip us to take the opportunities and overcome the challenges that we face as a society
-
Only thing with Lib Dems is that under FPTP system they just cant win.
They got 7.4 % of all vores cast and got 12 Seats (thats 1.8% of the Seats on offer)
Tories got 42.4 % of all votes cast and got 317 Seats (thats almost 49% of the Seats on offer)
In short Tories got 6 times more votes than Lib Dems BUT 26 and a Half times the number of Seats
PR now !
-
Jason Beattie
I'd forgotten that Dominic Cummings told the Economist in 2016 there was a "strong democratic case" for putting any Brexit deal back to the peoplehttps://t.co/eOiQk0HTXJ
September 4, 2019
This is what Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s de facto chief of staff, said about a second referendum in an Economist interview in January 2016 (before the referendum on leaving the EU). At the time, Cummings was campaign director for Vote Leave. Asked if he thought the government would hold a second referendum, on the terms of Brexit, in the event of a vote to leave, Cummings replied.
I think that is a distinct possibility, yes. It’s obviously not something that we can force. We’re a campaign group. But I think it is perfectly possible that leadership candidates to replace David Cameron will say that they think there are good grounds for a new government team to offer the public a voice on what the deal looks like. And we obviously wouldn’t oppose that, if that’s what senior politicians want to offer. I think there’s a strong democratic case for it.
There’s also the issue of the profound loss of trust that the establishment has suffered over the past 20-30 years. All parties have told lies about this subject, whether it’s John Major and David Cameron or Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Nick Clegg. People have repeatedly promised referendums then not held referendums. So given that, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if leadership candidates to replace Cameron said: we need a mechanism so people can have confidence in what we say.
-
Brexit brought to you by rent seekers and carpet baggers.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has told EU diplomats that the Brexit talks are stuck in “paralysis”, the Financial Times is reporting (paywall). It says:
The EU’s chief negotiator told envoys from member states that Britain was determined to diverge from EU standards as part of a future trade deal, adding further tension between Mr Johnson’s government and the bloc.
According to a leaked diplomatic note seen by the Financial Times, Mr Barnier said: “we are currently in a state of paralysis”.
The warning came on the same day that David Frost, the UK’s chief negotiator, met for more than six hours with his EU counterpart. EU officials said Mr Frost provided no suggestions for how the UK could replace the Irish backstop from the Brexit divorce deal while maintaining an open border in Ireland ...
Along with demands on the backstop, Mr Frost has also called for a trade agreement that would allow the UK to break free of EU regulations in areas such as social and environmental standards. The demand reneges on promises made by Theresa May’s government and has emerged as another stumbling bloc in the talks over the past week.
Mr Barnier warned EU envoys that any free-trade deal where Britain could undercut Brussels standards would face ratification problems in EU capitals. Some, such as Paris and The Hague, are determined not to allow Britain gain a competitive edge over the EU by undermining the single market after Brexit.
-
Looks like Corbyn, under his usual pressure from the 4Ms, is utterly determined to f**k up any chance Labour has of pulling lost voters back from the LDs and Greens.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49646544
-
Looks like Corbyn, under his usual pressure from the 4Ms, is utterly determined to f**k up any chance Labour has of pulling lost voters back from the LDs and Greens.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49646544
To be fair I think that's been their take from day 1. They want soft Brexit but would choose no Brexit over a hard or no deal Brexit.
I'd be OK with that because we do actually need to bring the country back together and delivering Brexit but one that doesn't f*ck up the country completely has to be the choice.
-
Cameron started Brexit to stop Farage distilling the right wing vote.
May invented the red lines.
May asked for the backstop it was a Tory idea.
Tories didn’t start negotiations for years. Tories decided not to invite other parties to talks.
All of this Brexit shitshow is Tory
-
DO
With respect, that is missing the point.
Labour has lost between 4-6million supporters since Xmas, almost all of them to avowedly Remain-supporting parties.
If they don't pull a fair old chunk of them back, it doesn't matter what policy Labour has on Brexit. They won't get within farting distance of Downing Street.
And headlines like this are not the way to pull those supporters back.
-
Labour has a Brexit policy? There was me thinking it was the below;
1. Criticise the government policy.
2. Sit on the fence and not commit either way.
END!
There is a conference coming, is it not the case that the members may end up dictating the policy?
-
Billy if you are waiting for the BBC to give Labour a fair headline you will be waiting a long time.
Labour to offer only 1 choice in a referendum might be what you want to hear - but it wont help retain the 60 or so Labour leave seats they need to defend 'to get within farting distance of Downing Street'.
-
Labour has a Brexit policy? There was me thinking it was the below;
1. Criticise the government policy.
2. Sit on the fence and not commit either way.
END!
There is a conference coming, is it not the case that the members may end up dictating the policy?
Labour's members always 'dictate' the policy - by err voting for it. The Tories always democratically decide theirs by not letting anyone vote for it.
-
But that's fine, different approaches are fine, it doesn't have to be a member led approach and we all have the choice over which party we favour - I'm certainly a nomad at the moment I dislike all of them and it would be a choice of who I dislike the least.
There is always that old theory, the successful strategy is one or the other, not the middle road. Certainly often holds up in business.
-
So its a choice between a 2nd referendum with Labour or revoking article 50 with the Lib Dems at the moment then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/liberal-democrats-poised-to-back-revoking-article-50-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
-
Labour has a Brexit policy? There was me thinking it was the below;
1. Criticise the government policy.
2. Sit on the fence and not commit either way.
END!
There is a conference coming, is it not the case that the members may end up dictating the policy?
Labour's members always 'dictate' the policy - by err voting for it. The Tories always democratically decide theirs by not letting anyone vote for it.
They do Wilts.
Except when they are manoeuvred out of being able to the vote that the membership would have really wanted on Brexit policy, like at Conference last year.
The membership is all powerful in terms of setting policy. Except when it is awkward for Corbyn and the 4Ms.
-
So its a choice between a 2nd referendum with Labour or revoking article 50 with the Lib Dems at the moment then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/liberal-democrats-poised-to-back-revoking-article-50-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
Yes, but you DO see the problem Labour now has?
A Labour Govt would look to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU and put it to a Referendum with Remain as the other option.
But that leaves two massive questions.
1) Will Labour then support Remain in that Referendum? How ridiculous would that look? Having negotiated a deal and then telling the country the deal shouldn't be supported.
2) Will Labour support their renegotiated deal? If Labour is going to do that, how on earth will that pull back any of the 4-6million votes they have lost to the LDs and Greens in the past 8 months?
Mr Rock, meet Mr Hard Place.
So it looks like we're going to get yet more constructive (sic) ambiguity from Corbyn. Refusing to say WHAT he'd do in the event of that Referendum occurring. And hoping that no-one asks too many questions.
I guess it might work. Like 2017, both sides might think he's on their side. But we're in a very different world now, and it seems far more likely to me that both sides will think he's being untrustworthy.
-
So its a choice between a 2nd referendum with Labour or revoking article 50 with the Lib Dems at the moment then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/liberal-democrats-poised-to-back-revoking-article-50-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
Yes, but you DO see the problem Labour now has?
A Labour Govt would look to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU and put it to a Referendum with Remain as the other option.
But that leaves two massive questions.
1) Will Labour then support Remain in that Referendum? How ridiculous would that look? Having negotiated a deal and then telling the country the deal shouldn't be supported.
2) Will Labour support their renegotiated deal? If Labour is going to do that, how on earth will that pull back any of the 4-6million votes they have lost to the LDs and Greens in the past 8 months?
Mr Rock, meet Mr Hard Place.
Some of Boris's Brigade are making a big deal of this, namely that it would be ridiculous for Labour to renegotiate a deal and then campaign to Remain, thereby campaigning against their own deal.
I'm surprised you seem to have fallen into that trap BST.
I see no problem at all in Labour renegotiating a deal, then putting this to the country in Ref2 with Remain as the other option, their preferred option.
In fact I think that would be the responsible thing to do.
What they would effectively be saying to the country is:
"Right, here you go. Here's the best possible deal with which to leave the EU. There won't be a better one, and it is infinitely better than No Deal. But we happen to believe that the very best deal for the country is what we've already got, so we urge you to vote Remain".
I see nothing remotely ridiculous there.
-
Pancho
In that case, why not come out now and say that explicitly?
Campaign on the clear and unequivocal platform that Labour believes the best we can do is to stay in the EU, but accepts that this is an issue which splits the country. So Labour will do its level best to renegotiate the very best deal it can. And it will not be a catastrophe if the People decide to vote for that, rather than Remain in the Referendum.
Why not just say that? Loud and clear and unambiguous.
It's the constructive (sic) ambiguity that does my head in. It looks like a party and a man wishing this issue didn't exist and wanting to ignore it.
-
BST,
Thornberry said exactly that on "Question Time" the other evening.
It is difficult to know how to weight a prospective deal that has not yet been agreed.
A guide to the next steps are set out in this graphic;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEGtdu9WkAAn1uO.png
The TUC speech by JC today is here;
https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyn-speech-tuc-congress/
The mood music is for Cummings to revert to the May deal after pretending to have EU negotiations.
The pitch will be "look we tried, but other parties and the EU have combined to keep us down".
Cummings knows some Tories will go for it rather than "no deal", and some Labour right wingers will join.
This is the real reason the Government "forgot" to nominate tellers when this crept in.
-
BST,
Thornberry said exactly that on "Question Time" the other evening.
It is difficult to know how to weight a prospective deal that has not yet been agreed.
A guide to the next steps are set out in this graphic;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEGtdu9WkAAn1uO.png
The TUC speech by JC today is here;
https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyn-speech-tuc-congress/
The mood music is for Cummings to revert to the May deal after pretending to have EU negotiations.
The pitch will be "look we tried, but other parties and the EU have combined to keep us down".
Cummings knows some Tories will go for it rather than "no deal", and some Labour right wingers will join.
This is the real reason the Government "forgot" to nominate tellers when this crept in.
I didn't see Thornberry say that. I hope she wasn't slapped down by the 4Ms like the last time she suggested a Brexit policy that hadn't been ok'd by McCluskey.
-
So its a choice between a 2nd referendum with Labour or revoking article 50 with the Lib Dems at the moment then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/liberal-democrats-poised-to-back-revoking-article-50-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
Yes, but you DO see the problem Labour now has?
A Labour Govt would look to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU and put it to a Referendum with Remain as the other option.
But that leaves two massive questions.
1) Will Labour then support Remain in that Referendum? How ridiculous would that look? Having negotiated a deal and then telling the country the deal shouldn't be supported.
2) Will Labour support their renegotiated deal? If Labour is going to do that, how on earth will that pull back any of the 4-6million votes they have lost to the LDs and Greens in the past 8 months?
Mr Rock, meet Mr Hard Place.
So it looks like we're going to get yet more constructive (sic) ambiguity from Corbyn. Refusing to say WHAT he'd do in the event of that Referendum occurring. And hoping that no-one asks too many questions.
I guess it might work. Like 2017, both sides might think he's on their side. But we're in a very different world now, and it seems far more likely to me that both sides will think he's being untrustworthy.
The solution to that would be to make the referendum campaign non-party, as in 1975.
-
So its a choice between a 2nd referendum with Labour or revoking article 50 with the Lib Dems at the moment then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/09/liberal-democrats-poised-to-back-revoking-article-50-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
Yes, but you DO see the problem Labour now has?
A Labour Govt would look to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU and put it to a Referendum with Remain as the other option.
But that leaves two massive questions.
1) Will Labour then support Remain in that Referendum? How ridiculous would that look? Having negotiated a deal and then telling the country the deal shouldn't be supported.
2) Will Labour support their renegotiated deal? If Labour is going to do that, how on earth will that pull back any of the 4-6million votes they have lost to the LDs and Greens in the past 8 months?
Mr Rock, meet Mr Hard Place.
So it looks like we're going to get yet more constructive (sic) ambiguity from Corbyn. Refusing to say WHAT he'd do in the event of that Referendum occurring. And hoping that no-one asks too many questions.
I guess it might work. Like 2017, both sides might think he's on their side. But we're in a very different world now, and it seems far more likely to me that both sides will think he's being untrustworthy.
Voters will be judging all three parties leaders on their trustworthiness. And what it appears they will get are the Lib Dems saying they know best, there will be no referendum and they will revoke Article 50 without a say from the people, and the Tory/Farage alliance saying there will be no referendum, they will leave deal or no deal without a say from the people and Labour offering a democratic choice.
Which one of those will resonate most in a 2 month election campaign?
-
Wilts.
I dunno.
Here's one back at you. Why do you think Labour has lost 4-6million supporters to the LDs and Greens this year?
-
Labour were still polling at 35-38% until the EU elections - so at a guess I would say that it was people who were Labour supporters then voting for other parties at those elections that was the main cause.
Well done to those people in helping the Tories to victory in the next election - because the LD's & Greens are not going to win it. If they want to reduce the Labour vote - objective achieved.
-
Of course this all surmising there wont be a Brexit deal before the next election. The Guardian seems to think backbenchers may have a cross-party majority for a revised May deal with a referendum:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/10/mps-look-to-bring-back-mays-brexit-deal-with-vote-on-referendum
-
No they weren't Wilts.
The last time Labour scored 38% in any national poll was 5 April, nearly 2 months before the EU elections.
Last time Labour was AVERAGING 35% was in the last week of February.
Your second paragraph is depressingly familiar to anyone who's had years of dealing with the far Left. Insist that you're right, then blame everyone else for not voting with you when they don't.
I KNOW that people voting LD and Green will put the Tories in power. I've been saying it for 2 years. The point is, what are Labour going to do to bring them back? Because Corbyn's speech today seems designed to drive them further away.
-
That Channel 4 polling analysis.
LD's - 16% of he vote will win them 22 seats.
https://www.channel4.com/news/general-election-may-not-end-brexit-impasse-poll-analysis-suggests
Its a free country people can vote for who they want. Once again well done to those who voted against Labour in the EU elections. Your work is done - enjoy it.
-
Clearly it's not done. I voted LD, through gritted teeth, to send a message to the Labour party. It still doesn't seem to be listening.
But I won't vote LD in the general election. Because that is when it really matters.
As I've said many times, it's a pity that a few tens of thousands of people on the Left didn't have that sense of perspective when they refused to vote for Brown in 2010. We'd be in a very different place now.
-
Pancho
In that case, why not come out now and say that explicitly?
Campaign on the clear and unequivocal platform that Labour believes the best we can do is to stay in the EU, but accepts that this is an issue which splits the country. So Labour will do its level best to renegotiate the very best deal it can. And it will not be a catastrophe if the People decide to vote for that, rather than Remain in the Referendum.
Why not just say that? Loud and clear and unambiguous.
It's the constructive (sic) ambiguity that does my head in. It looks like a party and a man wishing this issue didn't exist and wanting to ignore it.
BST
I agree, what is needed is for Labour to be upfront and positive about their strategy.
I was really taking issue with your assertion that to re-negotiate a deal and then campaign for something else would be "ridiculous".
But yeah, clarity in Corbyn's position is what has been lacking all along, and has done severe damage to Labour's standing.
-
Pancho
In that case, why not come out now and say that explicitly?
Campaign on the clear and unequivocal platform that Labour believes the best we can do is to stay in the EU, but accepts that this is an issue which splits the country. So Labour will do its level best to renegotiate the very best deal it can. And it will not be a catastrophe if the People decide to vote for that, rather than Remain in the Referendum.
Why not just say that? Loud and clear and unambiguous.
It's the constructive (sic) ambiguity that does my head in. It looks like a party and a man wishing this issue didn't exist and wanting to ignore it.
BST
I agree, what is needed is for Labour to be upfront and positive about their strategy.
I was really taking issue with your assertion that to re-negotiate a deal and then campaign for something else would be "ridiculous".
But yeah, clarity in Corbyn's position is what has been lacking all along, and has done severe damage to Labour's standing.
And yet still this morning Labour representatives on the radio debating their different Brexit options. At a time where they can be clear and sieze momentum from other parties they are again unclear, it's baffling.
-
I thought that I had read something positive earlier that an economist had written about brexit but I was wrong.
-
You might we'll have heard about Patrick Minford being positive about Brexit.
He's about as maverick an economist as you'll find. He ignores gravity effects in trade (the principle that trade is easier with closer neighbours) which is one of THE most established principles of trade economics. And he blithely accepts that the Brexit he assumes in him economic models requires the "managed declined" of Northern, ex-industrial towns.
Oh aye. And he's got previous. Thatcher and Howe implemented his policy of cutting Govt spending at the depths of the 1981 recession. That turn a bad recession into a horrific one, resulting in 25% unemployment in the Dearne Valley. Fortunately, after a year of that idiotic experiment, they shite it and went back to textbook economics. But we've never really recovered from that.
-
101 basic salescraft, look after the client you already have.
-
£8bn position in shorts on the Pound taken by hedge funds that funded Vote Leave and/or Johnson's leadership bid.
https://bylinetimes.com/2019/09/11/brexit-disaster-capitalism-8-billion-bet-on-no-deal-crash-out-by-boris-johnsons-leave-backers/
They only make their money if we crash out with No Deal and the Pound collapses.
Still, I'm sure Johnson is standing up for the little man against the Elite, eh?
-
No Deal has never been likely to happen though has it?? Even with the PM I’m my packet I wouldn’t have got involved with that.
-
Gaz
Then explain why there was such a spike in short deals when Johnson became PM.
-
Gaz
Then explain why there was such a spike in short deals when Johnson became PM.
I know there was. I suppose the potential drop would be very sharp as opposed to a very slow rally for a gain. Large potential upside with a very limited potential of a loss. Sometimes you have to back value losers I suppose.
-
We may have lost over 100bn and be the laughing stock of the world but there is always a silver lining. Muppets are Us. Is there no end to this source of ridicule, when will the adults be allowed back in?
''Treasury under fire for pushing no-deal Brexit duty-free shopping, Social media users both ridicule advertising campaign and raise serious issues''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/11/treasury-under-fire-for-promoting-no-deal-brexit-duty-free-shopping
-
''Adding up what Brexit could cost the construction industry''
The anticipated decline in construction workers migrating to the UK from Europe and the rapidly increasing imported construction materials could cost the UK’s construction sector millions.
According to built-environment specialist Scape Group, the cost of EU building material imports is at its highest level in seven years – up 15.3% annually. The £5.7 billion worth of materials currently imported from the EU could increase in cost by 10% – which equates to a ‘Brexit cost’ of £570 million to UK construction.
“The construction sector is facing a toxic mix of issues which will inhibit its ability to deliver projects,” said Matt Carrington-Moore, Chief Marketing Officer at Scape Group, said. “The prospect of a fall in the number of construction workers from Europe, combined with the soaring cost of imported materials as well as the magnetic effect that large scale projects such as HS2 will have on the local supply chain, pose a serious risk to the quality and timely delivery of buildings and infrastructure.
“All of the evidence suggests that Brexit could trigger a significant decline in this country’s construction sector, and the impact that this has on UK PLC would be significant.”
Does anyone know anyone in the building industry that could be affected?
https://www.showhouse.co.uk/features/adding-up-what-brexit-could-cost-the-construction-industry/
-
Here's one Leave funder who got his money back in spades through shorting the Pound in June 2016.
https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1171902086751166464
-
''Michel Barnier: no grounds for reopening Brexit talks
EU’s top negotiator tells MEPs Britain has not offered credible proposals for Irish border''
MB has told MEPs there remain insufficient grounds for reopening formal negotiations over the Brexit withdrawal agreement, six months after Theresa May and the European commission closed them.
In a private briefing with the European parliament’s leaders, the EU’s chief negotiator said Boris Johnson’s officials had yet to offer any “legally credible and workable” proposals to replace the Northern Irish backstop on which the two negotiating teams could build.
Gosh all that work boris and his chief negotiator put in for nothing, nought, zip, zero, zilch, diddly-squat eh.
Added: nada
-
This is a superb way of simply showing the impossible position that May and Johnson have put themselves into.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rdanielkelemen/status/1172158699521155074
Three mutually incompatible promises.
THIS is why Brexit hasn't happened. Because those f**king idiots painted themselves into a corner from which there is no way out. It is simply impossible to satisfy all three of those red lines.
-
''Michel Barnier: no grounds for reopening Brexit talks
EU’s top negotiator tells MEPs Britain has not offered credible proposals for Irish border''
MB has told MEPs there remain insufficient grounds for reopening formal negotiations over the Brexit withdrawal agreement, six months after Theresa May and the European commission closed them.
In a private briefing with the European parliament’s leaders, the EU’s chief negotiator said Boris Johnson’s officials had yet to offer any “legally credible and workable” proposals to replace the Northern Irish backstop on which the two negotiating teams could build.
Gosh all that work boris and his chief negotiator put in for nothing, nought, zip, zero, zilch, diddly-squat eh.
Added: nada
there going to say that thou what do you expect them to say? Yes boris has come up with a way out of this? It’s not going to happen, all your doing is taking there word for it, bst said I was being played by boris on another thread could the same be happening to you with the eu?
-
Bpool
Is that it?
You have categorical evidence of lying on one side.
You have no evidence whatsoever of lying on the other side.
So you assume that both sides are lying.
Is that how you live your life? Assuming EVERYONE is lying?
-
Why don't you tell us what boris's cunning plan for an alternative backstop is bp
-
I never said that did I lol what I said is what do you expect them to say! And then said could I never said anyone was lying
-
Why don't you tell us what boris's cunning plan for an alternative backstop is bp
how am I supposed to know I no about as much as you
-
I've lost track of what you're saying period bp
-
Bpool.
I expect them to tell the truth. What do YOU expect them to do?
-
I expect them to yes but do mps tell the truth always bst do all labour and tories tell the truth?
-
f**king hell round and round we go...
-
You were talking about Michel Barnier and the European Commission, not MPs.
If I read you right, you're saying that you have no reason to doubt that Barnier was telling the truth today, when he said that Johnson hadn't tabled any substantive plan on which to start a re-negotiation.
I believe Barnier when he says that.
Because if he said that and was lying, it would be easy for Johnson to disprove him, by publishing the UK plan.
So, can we draw a line under that "what do you expect them to say" nonsense, and accept that Johnson is lying and Barnier isn't?
-
What 1 person sees as acceptable another does not, they have said they will publish the plan let’s hope it is a good 1
-
What 1 person sees as acceptable another does not, they have said they will publish the plan let’s hope it is a good 1
It doesn't exist. Surely if the EU are calling you a liar you're going to show people your plans so you can prove that you aren't a liar.
-
If the EU say you're not getting a deal. If Amber Rudd says you're not getting a deal. If your own brother says you're not getting a deal.
Then you're not getting a deal.
-
I feel sorry for all the people that lose their jobs, houses and possibly lives all in the aid of lining a few millionaires pockets.
-
If the EU say you're not getting a deal. If Amber Rudd says you're not getting a deal. If your own brother says you're not getting a deal.
Then you're not getting a deal.
And if you have chance after chance to set out the deal you say you want...and never do.
-
meanwhile in the fairyland of murdoch: The Times
''Boris Johnson was handed a lifeline by the Democratic Unionist Party last night when it agreed to shift its red lines in a move that could help to unlock a Brexit deal.
The Times understands that, for the first time, the party has said it would accept Northern Ireland abiding by some European Union rules after Brexit in a deal to replace the Irish backstop.
The DUP has also said privately that it would drop its objection to regulatory checks in the Irish Sea, which it had called unacceptable as this would separate Northern Ireland “politically and economically” from the mainland''
BBC: ''DUP denies report it would accept Irish Sea checks''
''The DUP leader has refuted reports in the Times that the party is prepared to abide by some European rules after Brexit.
The newspaper said the DUP had agreed "to shift its red lines" as part of a new deal to replace the backstop.
It added the party had said privately that it would drop its objections to regulatory checks in the Irish Sea.
Arlene Foster tweeted the "UK must leave as one nation" and "anonymous sources lead to nonsense stories"''
-
Oh gawd not another expert with years of experience telling us that no-deal will be a mess, all this will do is just rile up and send brexiters into another spin about bombarding them with facts and figures and what it’s like in the real world.
‘’Hopes of clean break with EU are nonsense, says ex-Brexit official
A no-deal exit would trigger complex negotiations, argues former top DexEU civil servant’’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/14/hopes-of-clean-break-with-eu-are-nonsense-says-ex-brexit-official
-
don't you think that if Labour, or Corbyn, or any opposition, anti-no deal politician had lied they would be all over the front pages of the right wing rags? That is proof in itself that this Johnson, this Government and the Tory party are far more culpable. And the fact that even STILL Tory supporters and Brexiteers are still trying to justify these actions or transfer blame (quick, look over there at Labour!) is very, very worrying.
-
Wonder what will happen when he eventually brakes the law, slap on the wrist and gets to carry on?
-
I thought the Lib Dems wanted to stop Brexit? I can't se how many people they are going to win over with the argument saying we should remain because of a future world order based on empires, but there you go.
https://twitter.com/TomKibasi/status/1173157909947133953
-
I thought the Lib Dems wanted to stop Brexit? I can't se how many people they are going to win over with the argument saying we should remain because of a future world order based on empires, but there you go.
https://twitter.com/TomKibasi/status/1173157909947133953
A Liberal activist was being interviewed on the radio earlier. They said they believed that the Liberals should continue to push for a ‘People’s Vote’ and they should firmly endorse remaining in the EU, whilst promising to deliver on the result of the vote. The irony of this statement was as delicious as my Sunday dinner
-
I thought the Lib Dems wanted to stop Brexit? I can't se how many people they are going to win over with the argument saying we should remain because of a future world order based on empires, but there you go.
https://twitter.com/TomKibasi/status/1173157909947133953
Tom Kibasi is normally very astute but this is just a stupid criticism.
Verhofstadt is simply stating a fact. The medium term future is not one in which small countries have much clout. There's a group of nationalistic, economically aggressive nations which effectively ARE empires, in as much as that they have or will have the heft to dominate and manipulate small counties. China, India, USA, a Brazil-dominated Mercosur, a middle East dominated by whoever wins the struggle between Iran and Saudi Arabia/UAE.
No individual country in Europe will have remotely the strength of any of those groups.
That's the fact that Verhofstadt is making and it's intellectually vacuous and mendacious to suggest he's banging the Imperial drum.
-
Not Brexit related but probably Leave voted related, Daily Mail and the Times reported that the RNLI give money to countries abroad so a lot of Daily Mail readers are cancelling their donations. The amount that's given equates to 2% of the donations so in reality they're cancelling donations which 98% of which help Brits. What a world we live in where people would rather see humans drowned, wherever they're from.
-
Thing is people are starting to see these big charity's in different lights.When I was a kid you used to go see the lifeboats at the seaside,they were always after donations for a new boat or equipment and you watched tales of heroism on the telly..So people chuck in because it's something that effects them..Recently all we've seen of the RNLI in the media is many story's of men who have given years of volunteer service being sacked for having a boob cup in the canteen and similar ridiculous political correctness gone mad..
I believe similar feelings are surfacing with the public with big business Charity's like the RSPCA and Mcmillon Nurses and countless others...With social media these days people only want to talk about the bad things that happen rather than recognise the good they do.For instance a friend of mine posted a while ago on social media about Mcmillon cancer,who had failed her mum on 3 days in a week by failing to turn up as arranged to provide some basic care to her mum..She complained and a area manager came around to tell her that they were struggling with manpower and there was only so much resources available to fund..Who promptly got in his brand new series 5 bmw and drove off...People don't like that sort of thing,When they give a quid in a charity box they want it to go to what they think it's for not 34p of it...When they realise that they have ceo's on hundreds of thousands a year they become more reluctant...
Of course just on a side note,it wont just be Daily mail readers who have cancelled donations,this story has been carried on various media outlets..
-
I donate regularly to a few charities and always chip in to others. Some years ago one that I donated to monthly was Save the Children. I saw in the paper that TV presenter Sue Cook was being paid over £60,000 a year to be a part time face and fundraiser. That was the end of my monthly subscription to them.
-
BBC News - Brexit: UK offers no solution to replace backstop, says EU
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49709430 (http://BBC News - Brexit: UK offers no solution to replace backstop, says EU
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49709430)
We don't like this thing.
OK what do you want in place of this thing.
Something else.
Like?
Something else.
-
BBC News - Brexit: UK offers no solution to replace backstop, says EU
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49709430 (http://BBC News - Brexit: UK offers no solution to replace backstop, says EU
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49709430)
We don't like this thing.
OK what do you want in place of this thing.
Something else.
Like?
Something else.
But can't we have something else instead? or at least something different, or at least an alternative but something at least so long as it's not the same.
-
They'll give the backstop a new name and pretend it's something different.
-
They'll give the backstop a new name and pretend it's something different.
what about berkstop? cos it's stopped the berk!
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
When he’s in jail doing time for his advisor
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
He's upping the ante.
He KNOWS that he cannot legally leave with No Deal. He KNOWS that the law will stop him. But he wants then to be able to turn round to the Electorate's Brexit Death Cultists (35% of the population - enough to win an Election) and say that he wanted to give them what they wanted. He wants to heap the blame for his failure on Parliament and the Law.
At least I HOPE that's what it is.
Disgraceul as that would be, it's better than the alternative. That he actually IS going to ignore the law and tip us into THAT mother of all crises. Because that's how civil wars start.
-
Just heard a very insightful interview with a guy called Robert Hardy who used to run the customs terminal at the Port of Dover. He was responding to a caller on a radio show who contacted the show and warned of import chaos if we leave without a deal. This was Robert Hardys response:
“I think you're going to have to go out of your way to be delayed. A consignment from Europe has a document which is then lodged at the port. It will then arrive in Dover in transit, exactly like it is today. Your first import declaration in a no-deal Brexit environment is due at the end of six months. You've got six months to do the import entry.”
“In a no-deal plan, the only thing that's going to have any difference from today is the EU exporter needs to raise an export declaration. That's the end of Brexit no-deal planning."
When asked why we hear so many stories of food shortages and traffic jams in Kent if everything is so simple he responded: "If there are any problems with motorways in Kent, it will be getting out again.
"But the government have literally today released a project which I've been working on for quite a few months, which is 150 pop-up stations and truck parks across the UK and Europe, where drivers can call in and have their paperwork checked so that they can approach the border knowing everything is in place.
"These will be all over the UK, so the message is don't come into Kent unless you are border-ready."
-
Just heard a very insightful interview with a guy called Robert Hardy who used to run the customs terminal at the Port of Dover. He was responding to a caller on a radio show who contacted the show and warned of import chaos if we leave without a deal. This was Robert Hardys response:
“I think you're going to have to go out of your way to be delayed. A consignment from Europe has a document which is then lodged at the port. It will then arrive in Dover in transit, exactly like it is today. Your first import declaration in a no-deal Brexit environment is due at the end of six months. You've got six months to do the import entry.”
“In a no-deal plan, the only thing that's going to have any difference from today is the EU exporter needs to raise an export declaration. That's the end of Brexit no-deal planning."
When asked why we hear so many stories of food shortages and traffic jams in Kent if everything is so simple he responded: "If there are any problems with motorways in Kent, it will be getting out again.
"But the government have literally today released a project which I've been working on for quite a few months, which is 150 pop-up stations and truck parks across the UK and Europe, where drivers can call in and have their paperwork checked so that they can approach the border knowing everything is in place.
"These will be all over the UK, so the message is don't come into Kent unless you are border-ready."
That sounds like AEO operators, not general freightage. AEOs have different rules and very different types of verifications.
There's no way you'll get Customs Clearance on a random consignment without a Customs Declaration to check it against at the time of import, and certainly not six months later! Also, most general freight containers have dozens of separate consignments all consolidated together in one container, each of which will require two separate declarations - an Export Declaration to be lodged with the country it is leaving and an Import Declaration to be lodged in the country it's entering.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
[/quote
In the future, when historians are poring over the whole Brexit debacle and trying to fathom out why the country became so angry and polarised THIS one comment will sum it up perfectly. Well done NNK.
-
Just heard a very insightful interview with a guy called Robert Hardy who used to run the customs terminal at the Port of Dover. He was responding to a caller on a radio show who contacted the show and warned of import chaos if we leave without a deal. This was Robert Hardys response:
“I think you're going to have to go out of your way to be delayed. A consignment from Europe has a document which is then lodged at the port. It will then arrive in Dover in transit, exactly like it is today. Your first import declaration in a no-deal Brexit environment is due at the end of six months. You've got six months to do the import entry.”
“In a no-deal plan, the only thing that's going to have any difference from today is the EU exporter needs to raise an export declaration. That's the end of Brexit no-deal planning."
When asked why we hear so many stories of food shortages and traffic jams in Kent if everything is so simple he responded: "If there are any problems with motorways in Kent, it will be getting out again.
"But the government have literally today released a project which I've been working on for quite a few months, which is 150 pop-up stations and truck parks across the UK and Europe, where drivers can call in and have their paperwork checked so that they can approach the border knowing everything is in place.
"These will be all over the UK, so the message is don't come into Kent unless you are border-ready."
That sounds like AEO operators, not general freightage. AEOs have different rules and very different types of verifications.
There's no way you'll get Customs Clearance on a random consignment without a Customs Declaration to check it against at the time of import, and certainly not six months later! Also, most general freight containers have dozens of separate consignments all consolidated together in one container, each of which will require two separate declarations - an Export Declaration to be lodged with the country it is leaving and an Import Declaration to be lodged in the country it's entering.
Not sure Glyn. You clearly know more about this than me. However, as the former Customs Master at Dover I’d take his expertise as read. Saying that though, he has also been working with the Government on no deal preparation so I guess he could have a slightly biased opinion.
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
If it is, either he's very out of touch with his former job or he's a random Brexit bullshitter (funny how he doesn't give his name!) who's heard of Entry Summary Declarations and is trying to pretend that they are Customs Declarations.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-outlines-phased-approach-for-entry-summary-declarations
Importers will still be required to submit import declarations for customs purposes – which are not the same as Entry Summary Declarations.
-
Or maybe he's right?
-
No he isn't.
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
Yes, that’s the one BB. A bit of research suggests that he was also a Director for P&O and has done a few interviews regarding ‘Port Readiness’ over the past few months.
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
If it is, either he's very out of touch with his former job or he's a random Brexit bullshitter (funny how he doesn't give his name!) who's heard of Entry Summary Declarations and is trying to pretend that they are Customs Declarations.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-outlines-phased-approach-for-entry-summary-declarations
Importers will still be required to submit import declarations for customs purposes – which are not the same as Entry Summary Declarations.
Glyn
Do you have any experience of customs port management? Your replies suggest that you do have some knowledge in this area?
-
Glyn, what's AEO?
-
More radio ads today telling me to "get ready for Brexit". But how? We don't know if we're leaving with a deal or without one, or not leaving at all. Legally, with no withdrawal bill passed we are obliged to request an extension. So why are wasting £100m on useless propaganda?
-
Those ads are on the telly too..
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
If it is, either he's very out of touch with his former job or he's a random Brexit bullshitter (funny how he doesn't give his name!) who's heard of Entry Summary Declarations and is trying to pretend that they are Customs Declarations.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-outlines-phased-approach-for-entry-summary-declarations
Importers will still be required to submit import declarations for customs purposes – which are not the same as Entry Summary Declarations.
Glyn
Do you have any experience of customs port management? Your replies suggest that you do have some knowledge in this area?
I was with Customs & Excise and then HMRC for twenty years, all in the Inland Customs and ending as an International Trade Officer. It was part of my job to now about import and export rules, regulations and procedures - in both UK Law and EU Law - inside out.
-
Glyn, what's AEO?
Authorised Economic Operator
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/notice-117-authorised-economic-operator/notice-117-authorised-economic-operator
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
-
I would't say they're stupid. I'd say that they're ignorant of the complexities of the EU, and without any inclination to divest themselves of that ignorance. Which then leaves them wide open to be manipulated.
-
Just seen this. "Farmers will feed us all after Brexit".
Just wondered if people who believe this realise that 95% of farm workers in the UK are foreign, most are seasonal workers who come here because of FOM. Just saying....
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
Corbyn has never been pro-EU, so it's not a lie I've ever believed.
Now it's your turn, do YOU, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now?
-
never mind Corbyn , answer the question.
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible , and confirmable way in which you, me and my family
will be better off by the UK leaving the EU ?
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible, and confirmable way in being in the EU makes things difficult for you.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
What? I'm not allowed to defend myself against someone who says Brexiters are stupid?
You're so blinkered and partisan that you've lost the ability to think clearly and objectively. Is that an insult? If so, have that one on me.
-
is this the interview?
https://youtu.be/YggHsc0LvyI
If it is, either he's very out of touch with his former job or he's a random Brexit bullshitter (funny how he doesn't give his name!) who's heard of Entry Summary Declarations and is trying to pretend that they are Customs Declarations.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hmrc-outlines-phased-approach-for-entry-summary-declarations
Importers will still be required to submit import declarations for customs purposes – which are not the same as Entry Summary Declarations.
Glyn
Do you have any experience of customs port management? Your replies suggest that you do have some knowledge in this area?
I was with Customs & Excise and then HMRC for twenty years, all in the Inland Customs and ending as an International Trade Officer. It was part of my job to now about import and export rules, regulations and procedures - in both UK Law and EU Law - inside out.
I see - Cheers
-
SS
NNK didn't say you were stupid.
He was asking whether Johnson thinks you are stupid.
Given what has happened over the past 3 years, I think that's a fair question. I've siad myself several times that the only conclusion I can come to is that prominent Brexiters either think than Brexit supporters are too stupid to see the inconsistencies in their approaches or they think that Brexit supporters simply don't care.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
What? I'm not allowed to defend myself against someone who says Brexiters are stupid?
You're so blinkered and partisan that you've lost the ability to think clearly and objectively. Is that an insult? If so, have that one on me.
And it's a hat-trick!
I'm not saying don't defend your viewpoint but don't you think it makes you look a total prat when you continually moan about people sneering on this forum when it's all you ever do yourself to 'defend' yourself?
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
NNK
Your sweeping generalisation that others who don’t share your view as ‘stupid’ is unnecessary and says more about you than those who you deem to be stupid. You don’t think the frustration goes both ways? I’ve read comments from leavers and remainers that beggars belief. I’ve seen remainers make the most outrageous denials about the EU that are just simply wrong! Misguided maybe, but stupid no.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
What? I'm not allowed to defend myself against someone who says Brexiters are stupid?
You're so blinkered and partisan that you've lost the ability to think clearly and objectively. Is that an insult? If so, have that one on me.
And it's a hat-trick!
I'm not saying don't defend your viewpoint but don't you think it makes you look a total prat when you continually moan about people sneering on this forum when it's all you ever do yourself to 'defend' yourself?
A total prat? I think you need to be a bit careful with your words old lad.
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
What? I'm not allowed to defend myself against someone who says Brexiters are stupid?
You're so blinkered and partisan that you've lost the ability to think clearly and objectively. Is that an insult? If so, have that one on me.
Where did I say Brexiteers are stupid?
Now, are YOU going to answer the question I've asked YOU twice already - Do YOU, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now?
Then maybe try and answer foxbat's two questions from earlier too.
Or is that too much to ask?
-
Maybe I’m being really simple here..
BJ is telling the EU he is prepared to leave on 31 Oct with no deal, and won’t accept an extension. But the UK now has a law that he must ask for an extension of Brexit is not resolved with an agreement by 17/18 October..
Does that mean he is blatantly saying he IS prepared to break the law.? Does he think the EU politicians and our own Parliament are stupid.?
When will this stupid idiot accept that no deal is not an option..?
Nope, but he knows that a large number of the British public are; and that's all that matters.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Firstly, there's only one of me - not a 'lot'.
Secondly, when something is shown to be either a lie or just plain wrong, then if people a) continue to believe it and/or b) continue to repeat it, or c) base all their arguments on it then what are they other than stupid?
Do you, honestly, still believe the lies that not only were being told then, but are continuing to be told now? An awful lot of people still do.
You're one of a lot on here that constantly sneer and insult.
As regards lies, do you still believe the lie that Corbyn is pro-EU?
So are you, looking at the posts you've made only today.
Show me where I've insulted anyone.
Stupid? Well done NNK, true to form.
You lot just don't get it do you?
Two sneers for the price of one right there.
What? I'm not allowed to defend myself against someone who says Brexiters are stupid?
You're so blinkered and partisan that you've lost the ability to think clearly and objectively. Is that an insult? If so, have that one on me.
And it's a hat-trick!
I'm not saying don't defend your viewpoint but don't you think it makes you look a total prat when you continually moan about people sneering on this forum when it's all you ever do yourself to 'defend' yourself?
A total prat? I think you need to be a bit careful with your words old lad.
Why should I be careful? I haven't called you one. But then, judging by the assumptions you jump to all the time you do seem to have a lot of problems understanding what other people have written in plain English.
It's also very telling that you jump on a perceived insult - but which isn't - and yet you don't deny sneering at everybody.
-
never mind Corbyn , answer the question.
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible , and confirmable way in which you, me and my family
will be better off by the UK leaving the EU ?
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible, and confirmable way in being in the EU makes things difficult for you.
The problem with that question is that you sometimes get a reply that you don’t like and go into denial (not you specifically, but remainers in general). Earlier this year we discussed rail nationalisation as a benefit of leaving and how EU membership makes this almost impossible (and after 2023 will become even more difficult) and I was shouted down! Even though I know from absolute experience that it’s true! See what I mean?
So, let’s try another. One of the reasons I voted leave was that I’m very uncomfortable with Britain being part of the ever closer union that Brussels is moving towards. If we were to stay in the EU I doubt it’d continue to be on our current terms. I could see the U.K. rebate disappearing, increased regulatory alignment, eventual membership of the Euro and the EU army.
By leaving we’d immediately be able to begin making free trade agreements with the rest of the world. We’d have full control of our fisheries and agriculture, which given the size of our population, we could offset any loss in exports by increased domestic consumption.
Brexit is full of uncertainty. Nobody knows what’s going to happen but we all know what could happen. Brexit can be a success or a failure and that depends on the people delivering it.
-
Aldi are clearly concerned about their future in the U.K. After Brexit! So much so that they are investing £350 million in new Stores.
-
never mind Corbyn , answer the question.
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible , and confirmable way in which you, me and my family
will be better off by the UK leaving the EU ?
Or:
tell me just ONE tangible, and confirmable way in being in the EU makes things difficult for you.
The problem with that question is that you sometimes get a reply that you don’t like and go into denial (not you specifically, but remainers in general). Earlier this year we discussed rail nationalisation as a benefit of leaving and how EU membership makes this almost impossible (and after 2023 will become even more difficult) and I was shouted down! Even though I know from absolute experience that it’s true! See what I mean?
So, let’s try another. One of the reasons I voted leave was that I’m very uncomfortable with Britain being part of the ever closer union that Brussels is moving towards. If we were to stay in the EU I doubt it’d continue to be on our current terms. I could see the U.K. rebate disappearing, increased regulatory alignment, eventual membership of the Euro and the EU army.
By leaving we’d immediately be able to begin making free trade agreements with the rest of the world. We’d have full control of our fisheries and agriculture, which given the size of our population, we could offset any loss in exports by increased domestic consumption.
Brexit is full of uncertainty. Nobody knows what’s going to happen but we all know what could happen. Brexit can be a success or a failure and that depends on the people delivering it.
They’ve not managed very well since the referendum, have they.?
-
I’d agree IDM, they done an awful job and we now find ourselves in this ungodly mess
-
Aldi are clearly concerned about their future in the U.K. After Brexit! So much so that they are investing £350 million in new Stores.
Perhaps they foresee an increase in the the number of people reduced to shopping in them?
-
big boom for budget food stores . Brexiters looking forward to the return to powdered egg to celebrate how ' we won the war ' .
They used to make a ' marmalade ' out of carrots, apparently, cant wait for that.
who says you can't enjoy living in a 3rd world country ?
-
big boom for budget food stores . Brexiters looking forward to the return to powdered egg to celebrate how ' we won the war ' .
They used to make a ' marmalade ' out of carrots, apparently, cant wait for that.
who says you can't enjoy living in a 3rd world country ?
Perhaps they ought to sign up Mark 'Uncle Albert' Francois to front the ad campaign..?
-
big boom for budget food stores . Brexiters looking forward to the return to powdered egg to celebrate how ' we won the war ' .
They used to make a ' marmalade ' out of carrots, apparently, cant wait for that.
who says you can't enjoy living in a 3rd world country ?
Perhaps they ought to sign up Mark 'Uncle Albert' Francois to front the ad campaign..?
840 Aldi stores opened in the UK while we’ve been in the EU, so it can’t be that bad can it? Fancy having budget food stores in the land of EU milk and honey...
-
HA
I don't understand you.
You're a socialist, no?
You've seen Brexit hijacked by the extreme Right of British politics.
What do you think is going to come out well from this?
Honest, open question.
-
big boom for budget food stores . Brexiters looking forward to the return to powdered egg to celebrate how ' we won the war ' .
They used to make a ' marmalade ' out of carrots, apparently, cant wait for that.
who says you can't enjoy living in a 3rd world country ?
Perhaps they ought to sign up Mark 'Uncle Albert' Francois to front the ad campaign..?
840 Aldi stores opened in the UK while we’ve been in the EU, so it can’t be that bad can it? Fancy having budget food stores in the land of EU milk and honey...
Aldi and Lidl Dominate the German supermarket scene, hardly in the class of Neto and. I am afraid it must be very disappointing for the people on hear trying to undermine Brexit, just look at some of the Purile comments from two of the main culprits,Foxbat and Glynn Wigley,no doubt Sidney rover and Billy will be jumping on the band wagon.I am calmly waiting for the diatribe of abuse I will be getting from the remain camp followers on this board. Take it on the chin gang one of the largest retailers on the planet has given Brexit and Boris Johnson a massive vote of confidence today,!!! You have all been blown out of the water!
-
Netto doesn't exist in the UK any more and hasn't for some years. Good job for Aldi and Lidl that they aren't in their class, isn't it?
-
Well you'd be the one most able to recognise it Sproty cos most of what you write on politics is unmitigated unsubstantiated diatribe
-
HA
I don't understand you.
You're a socialist, no?
You've seen Brexit hijacked by the extreme Right of British politics.
What do you think is going to come out well from this?
Honest, open question.
Billy
I don’t understand why you don’t get me?
Yes, I’m a Socialist but (hopefully) not a fervent, blinkered one but a Socialist all the same. It’s those Socialist values that influenced my view that we should leave the EU.
The EU has morphed into a bloated, undemocratic capitalist club. There’s never been anything remotely Socialist about the EU. I believe in Nationalisation of railways, water and power; something that there’s very little chance of delivering while in the EU and will become even more difficult come 2023. An industry will need to be in economic meltdown before nationalisation will be even considered by the EU. The imposed austerity measures on Greece and Italy also leave a sour taste.
I believe in the opportunities that Brexit could bring in delivering a modern, socialist economic policy; public ownership, lower rates of VAT, fair trade agreements with developing nations and state aid for sunrise industries (which I’ve seen from personal experience could be a huge positive for the U.K.). Much of this is at best difficult, or at worst illegal, under current EU law and there’s nothing at all the UK can do about it.
In 3 years, I’ve seen or heard nothing whatsoever to change my view on these points.
I get the economic advantage of membership. In an ideal world we’d revert back to a common market scenario. I occasionally work with business across the EU who trade with the U.K. and understand perfectly the benefits of this. However I do object to the political interference.
The thing is, none of this really matters though. People have stopped listening when it comes to Brexit. People have their views and are rigidly sticking to them, despite facts being presented to them. If you looked back over this thread you’d see several occasions where someone has asked for ‘just one benefit of leaving the EU’. Each time I’ve responded I’ve either been called a liar, wrong or simply been ignored.
That’s what has brought us to the point where we have Johnson as PM. Do I object to the fact that Brexit has been taken over by the right? Absolutely I do. Would I vote differently in a referendum if I knew this would be the case? ...it really does pain me to say it, but I very probably would.
Hope that helps
-
Appreciate your reply HA, I really do. You are actually the only person so far that has highlighted potential benefits, which I agree are potential benefits.
However, like you said, these things are also possible whilst still in the EU, although they may be more difficult to achieve. Public ownership and Lower VAT rates could be looked into right now, but a Tory government certainly wouldn't do these things, and it would be difficult for Labour unless they win an election with a majority.
These, for me, point to how Brexit has been used to deceive the majority of Brexiteers; the falsehood that all problems are caused by EU, and are somehow not political decisions made by the UK government. Privatisation, higher VAT, austerity - all choices made by the government; nothing to do AT ALL with the EU.
-
I get all that HA. I fully understand the Left argument against the EU, although I don't agree with it as I think the gains would be far outweighed by the trading losses. I also think the issue about political integration is a bogeyman that belongs to a past era and won't come back again with any strength in our lifetimes.
I very much agree with what you say about Greece, although strictly speaking, that was an issue about the Euro (which I think is a deeply flawed idea) and a specific and wrong obsession in Germany with a certain economic model rather than the EU. To me, the problem there, as ever, is that we need a strong counterweight to German influence, not to walk away from the EU. And I think the idea that we would somehow be forced into the Euro against our will is so far away from any realistic future scenario that it's not worth considering. If it DID happen, "I" would want to leave the EU, but I'd want to leave THEN, not now.
So yeah, I get all those arguments, even the ones I disagree with, because honest people can disagree.
What I don't get is how people of the Left didn't see that the process was all about the civil war on the Right of British politics, and that there was no way of them getting a socialist Brexit. Or, if there WAS a chance of that, there was at least an equal chance that Brexit would be driven through as a Hard Right scheme. That always seemed the clinching argument against Brexit from the Left. That a Left vote for Brexit strengthened the very people that we are most opposed to and made possible the worst sort of future outcome. THAT's the bit I don't get.
-
HA is Jeremy Corbyn.
-
I see that Farage's lies about the EU being undemocratic are still being permitted on here.
This isn't the BBC , statements like this being presented as truth won't go unchallenged
( how many times )
WE elect the MEPs , THEY elect the officials.
What could be more democratic than that ?
anyone ?
this from a country that has just had its parliament shut down like some 3rd world military dictatorship
-
I see that Farage's lies about the EU being undemocratic are still being permitted on here.
This isn't the BBC , statements like this being presented as truth won't go unchallenged
( how many times )
WE elect the MEPs , THEY elect the officials.
What could be more democratic than that ?
anyone ?
this from a country that has just had its parliament shut down like some 3rd world military dictatorship
Foxbat
I’m comfortable with having my views challenged...as I trust you are with yours too?
As I’m sure you’re fully aware, the European Parliament (where the MEP’s sit) has extremely limited powers. For example, it’s unable to initiate legislation.
The European Parliament and the Parliament of a sovereign state are NOT the same
The ‘power’ within the EU is reserved almost solely for the executive arm of the EU; The European Commission. The commission avows itself to “neither seek, nor take, from any government, institution, body, office or entity” So the democratically elected European Parliment and the democratically elected UK Parliament have virtually no say in the proposal of new EU wide legislation.
The commission is appointed by the European Council, which is made up of the heads of the member states. Consequently, the appointment of the commissioners is usually down to inter nation power plays. Our MEP’s can propose commissioners, but the council can choose to ignore this.
So, our MEP’s in the European Parliament have very little power and have virtually no say in the legislative nature of the EU.
Now do you understand why the EU is viewed as undemocratic?
Finally, do you require any other clarification on my post from earlier, or do you agree with what I said?
-
HA
I get the theoretical arguments about this awful, undemocratic bureaucracy in Brussels.
But I tend to prefer empirical evidence to theory.
In practice, what laws has it imposed on us that you wouldn't have wanted?
-
HA
I get the theoretical arguments about this awful, undemocratic bureaucracy in Brussels.
But I tend to prefer empirical evidence to theory.
In practice, what laws has it imposed on us that you wouldn't have wanted?
Billy
To be clear, I’ve not mentioned anything about laws imposed by the EU in my previous note. I was challenging foxbats view that the EU legislative practices are democratic. They’re not.
I can’t pretend to know all 12,000+ EU regulations that are presently mandated within the U.K. From the ones I do know, some I’m happy with and some not. For example, I’ve no problem with the climate change directive nor the working time directive. However, I’m much less comfortable with the child benefit for migrant workers law, the VAT on energy bills law, rules on state aid and EU public procurement rules.
However, this isn’t really the issue. The point is that all of these legislative rules are imposed by a commission that none of us vote for, they have no manifesto, have few (if any) independent policies and are largely beholden to individual heads of state with Germany and France having the largest influence. Additionally, not one of these laws couldn’t be introduced by our own democratically elected government.
Whilst I’d agree that there’s a huge amount of nonsense spread about the EU, the myth that it’s a democratic yet benign influence on U.K. laws and legislation is just that. A myth.
-
Appreciate your reply HA, I really do. You are actually the only person so far that has highlighted potential benefits, which I agree are potential benefits.
However, like you said, these things are also possible whilst still in the EU, although they may be more difficult to achieve. Public ownership and Lower VAT rates could be looked into right now, but a Tory government certainly wouldn't do these things, and it would be difficult for Labour unless they win an election with a majority.
These, for me, point to how Brexit has been used to deceive the majority of Brexiteers; the falsehood that all problems are caused by EU, and are somehow not political decisions made by the UK government. Privatisation, higher VAT, austerity - all choices made by the government; nothing to do AT ALL with the EU.
Thanks Bob
Just a small point of order though. While public ownership could be looked into now, realistically it could never, ever happen while we’re members. For the railways for example, EU rules forbid wholesale ownership of the whole infrastructure. What this means is that the UK government could own the trains, but would be unable to own the infrastructure. In addition, EU procurement rules (which are being tightened in 2023) dictate that all government contracts over a financial threshold, must be granted via an EU wide tender. Consequently, it’s impossible for the government to own all parts of the UK rail network. Some years ago, the French (I think) government tried to bypass this legislation by creating ‘fake’ private companies that were actually owned by the state and awarding these companies contracts. The EU soon got wind of this, forced them to dismantle the contract awards and subsequently took over the procurement to ensure no rules were broken.
-
Today's The Times take on the the 2 week deadline, nothing!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/
-
The 2 week deadline doesn't appear to concern The Tele either, I can't see it mentioined anywhere!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/
-
Nigel Farage walks into a pub and says, "I'll have a pint of beer, please." The barman pulls a pint, then throws it all over Farage.
'What did you do that for?' says Farage.
'Because you're in a metaphor which illustrates the stupidity of asking for something, but not stipulating how you wanted it delivered. '
'OK then... I'll have a pint -- this time in a glass!' says Farage.
'You can't ask again!' says the barman.
'Why not?' snivelled Farage.
'Democracy.' says the barman.
-
If you look at the original poll for this thread, which closed in December, only 11% of people at the time wanted no deal. Very interesting.
-
Nigel Farage walks into a pub and says, "I'll have a pint of beer, please." The barman pulls a pint, then throws it all over Farage.
'What did you do that for?' says Farage.
'Because you're in a metaphor which illustrates the stupidity of asking for something, but not stipulating how you wanted it delivered. '
'OK then... I'll have a pint -- this time in a glass!' says Farage.
'You can't ask again!' says the barman.
'Why not?' snivelled Farage.
'Democracy.' says the barman.
Love it.!!
-
Well, it's taken 144 pages (not to mention the other threads on this subject) but thanks to Herbert Anchovy we've finally got some well-reasoned, sensible, coherently argued and understandable points in favour of leaving the EU.
For that HA, I thank and salute you.
(PS: apologies if those same points have been made previously but I'm buggered if I'm going to check!).
-
Yes I agree but all those are minuscule in comparison to all the reasons for not leaving
-
Don't disagree with that Sydney, it's just a refreshing change to see some reasoned arguments from the Leavers viewpoint.
-
It's a refreshing change to hear any reasoned arguments from the leave camp Pancho
-
Not sure if this has been commented on...?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1179164/eu-news-western-balkans-expansion-austria-albania-north-macedonia-brigitte-bierlein
I know that Daniel Kawczynski is a eurosceptic, but he makes the point....
"Countries like Poland and Hungary have a shock coming when the UK leaves because that will cut the EU's budget by 20 percent. "They could find themselves paying for Kosovo, Moldova and even Ukraine and the boot will be on the other foot."
Fair argument or one-sided opinion?
-
It's a refreshing change to hear any reasoned arguments from the leave camp Pancho
Yep, I think that was pretty much what I was saying.
-
https://twitter.com/EmmaKennedy/status/1174702071691583488?s=19 (https://twitter.com/EmmaKennedy/status/1174702071691583488?s=19)
And some people think these are the good guys.
-
Just in the Government delivers a copy of its plans to the EU:
https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/burning-house-260nw-229782490.jpg
-
Not sure if this has been commented on...?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1179164/eu-news-western-balkans-expansion-austria-albania-north-macedonia-brigitte-bierlein
I know that Daniel Kawczynski is a eurosceptic, but he makes the point....
"Countries like Poland and Hungary have a shock coming when the UK leaves because that will cut the EU's budget by 20 percent. "They could find themselves paying for Kosovo, Moldova and even Ukraine and the boot will be on the other foot."
Fair argument or one-sided opinion?
As ever with the press, there’s a kernel of truth in the story, but you have to wade through a tonne of b*llocks to find it!
From my understanding (and I’m happy to be corrected) the UK is one of only a handful of net contributors to the EU ie we pay in more than we receive back financially. Consequently there will be a revenue shortfall when we leave. This means the EU either has to cut back on spending or other member states should make up the shortfall. Depending on where you research (and who you choose to believe) the net annual contribution that the UK makes to the EU is £10 billion pounds. So, basically the EU will ‘lose’ £10 billion income per year. This is why, quite understandably, the EU wants a ‘divorce’ payment.
To further complicate things, the next round of budget and revenue negotiation for 2021 to 2027 are due to begin. This is where decisions are made on how much each state will contribute. Bearing in mind the EU will no longer have the UKs £10 billion annual payment AND the UK is one of only a few countries that doesn’t receive more than it contributes, this creates a big problem.
The EU’s opinion MAY be that countries such as Poland that have financially benefited enormously from EU membership may now need to step up and contribute significantly more to support less well off countries. This isn’t likely to go down very well at all and would likely make, what are already difficult and often acrimonious negotiations, even more challenging.
That’s how I understand it anyway, but as I said I’m happy to be corrected if not.
-
The UK's net contribution is about £20 per person in the EU.
I think they'll cope...
-
The UK's net contribution is about £20 per person in the EU.
I think they'll cope...
Perhaps. However one of the only other net contributors, Denmark, has already firmly set its stall out and is refusing to increase its contribution. I’m sure they’ll cope...but it’s going to be messy.
-
Yes I agree but all those are minuscule in comparison to all the reasons for not leaving
Sydney
As a genuine and unloaded question on my part, what would you say are the 5 primary advantages to the UK remaining in the EU that would be impossible for us to introduce as non members?
-
The UK's net contribution is about £20 per person in the EU.
I think they'll cope...
Perhaps. However one of the only other net contributors, Denmark, has already firmly set its stall out and is refusing to increase its contribution. I’m sure they’ll cope...but it’s going to be messy.
HA
The point is that we have consistently overestimated our own importance in this process.
We were assured that we held all the cards in negotiations with the EU. We didn't. We held zero cards.
We are told that the EU finances would fall apart without our enormous contribution. It won't.
-
The UK's net contribution is about £20 per person in the EU.
I think they'll cope...
Perhaps. However one of the only other net contributors, Denmark, has already firmly set its stall out and is refusing to increase its contribution. I’m sure they’ll cope...but it’s going to be messy.
HA
The point is that we have consistently overestimated our own importance in this process.
We were assured that we held all the cards in negotiations with the EU. We didn't. We held zero cards.
We are told that the EU finances would fall apart without our enormous contribution. It won't.
Billy
It’s the extreme assertions again that have polluted the whole Brexit debate isn’t it?
The EU finances are clearly not going to fall apart when we leave, and whoever claimed that is an idiot.
However, it depends how you define overstated doesn’t it? If our contributions meant relatively little to the EU they wouldn’t be so insistent on a ‘divorce’ payment would they?
When your a club of 28 members, and 19 of those members either take out equal or more than they pay in (in some cases considerably more) and your second largest contributor is taken out of the equation, it’s going to leave a very large Brexit sized hole in the finances, however much you try to mitigate its impact. You don’t have to do too much research to see where certain countries (Denmark, France, Poland for example) are already indicating that they’ve no appetite for increased contributions without some payback for them.
-
I'm not saying at all that our contributions mean little.
I'm say they don't mean remotely as much as many folk have assumed.
And here's the massive issue that has screwed up our entire approach to Brexit. To the EU,trading with us is it as important as keeping the Single Market and Customs Union strong. If that had been clear in 2016, then we'd have known that these idiots who insisted that the EU would roll over and give us whatever deal we wanted were either ignorant or deliberately lying.
Thing is,we no DO know that they were ignorant or lying back then. And here's the rub. They are now running the country.
-
Yes I agree but all those are minuscule in comparison to all the reasons for not leaving
Sydney
As a genuine and unloaded question on my part, what would you say are the 5 primary advantages to the UK remaining in the EU that would be impossible for us to introduce as non members?
Tariff free trading with EU countries which I figure is one of the biggest advantages of being a member. The boost to trade with this alone would bury most of any advantages to leaving in financial terms. I think that Austerity will look like a walk on the park compared to what the cost will be over 10 years from point brexit and possibly longer.
The clout the EU has with making deals with non EU countries especially the US, I think Trump wants to separate us from the pack so he can screw us over and force us into a trade deal he could not otherwise implement if we were part of the EU. The tories have already shown us what they think of the NHS and when the treasury has nothing in it it would be just dandy for them to suggest that we can't afford to rebuild this or that hospital but there is this really nice US pharma/med insurance company that wants to help us out.
In Australia a lot of the large infrastructure contracts given to foreign countries/companies include deals where they can ring fence the site and bring in their own cheap labour to build the project, this is partly because we are a stand alone country and partly because the government is hard right wing.
Unlike a lot of brexiters I think that freedom of movement is a benefit to the UK and that the majority of them come to the UK to work hard and earn a living and makes Britain better in so many ways. I do not think that many British farmers and companies will survive without this pool of foreign labour and that the tories or whoever gets power following Brexit will find a way to give them access, in fact I think that most of the things that brexiters want will be denied to them by any incoming governments over time.
I can't give you a definitive list of things that can or cannot be done once any form of brexit happens and neither can the government, no one knows because there is no definitive contract that spells it out but I can hazard a guess that just about everything will cost more except over time British labour which will be screwed over by successive tory governments who will remove safeguards and reduce wages.
-
HA
There's one that I've made time and again which trumps every other argument.
Europe (us included) has a dreadful record of conflict and tyrrany.
No EU countries have ever started a war or been invaded or had a civil war whilst a member of the EU.
No EU country has ever had any form of Govt other than democracy whilst a member of the EU.
We just take that for granted, but it is a highly, highly unusual situation by historical standards.
Many of the politicians across Europe and the UK who are anti-EU want us to go back to a world of competing nations. I'm not saying they necessarily want conflict and instability, but the point is that the history of Europe when it hasn't had a unifying system is conflict and instability.
Nothing is more important than that fact.
-
HA.
On that topic, I'll refer you to these two posts..
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=270252.msg863622#msg863622
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=263860.msg817625#msg817625
I've never heard ANYONE who supports Brexit ever address these points.
-
HA
There's one that I've made time and again which trumps every other argument.
Europe (us included) has a dreadful record of conflict and tyrrany.
No EU countries have ever started a war or been invaded or had a civil war whilst a member of the EU.
No EU country has ever had any form of Govt other than democracy whilst a member of the EU.
We just take that for granted, but it is a highly, highly unusual situation by historical standards.
I totally agree with all this but I don't think this will change in the immediate future bst but and this is a huge but if our leaving destabilises the EU and other countries leave then I too think we could descend into the bad old days very quickly.
I think the danger of other countries leaving would be in the shorter term say 2-3 years because in the longer term those countries will see all too plainly the disadvantage that the UK would be in after that time.
As an aside I visited the Occupation Museum in Riga which showed in stark detail what it's like to be isolated and vulnerable.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/jean-claude-juncker-we-can-have-a-deal-and-brexit-will-happen-11814207 Maybe some movement by the eu?
-
No Bpool.
That's been the EU's position from the start.
If we come up with a deal that protects the Irish border without the backstop, they'll agree to it.
Nothing has changed at all.
-
Progress would have been a better word sorry
-
How is it progress? It's exactly what they've been saying for 2 years.
-
As junker says he has held talks with boris and they were positive talks i would say that is progress no?
-
That's politicking Bpool. He's going to big it up and be positive so he can say it's not his fadult when it goes tits up.
But the central issue still remains. If we don't propose something sensible in place of the backstop, there's no deal.
-
Let’s hope they do then mate
-
Looks like they are just toying with us then, holding back for the big surprise
-
Bpool.
I'll not hold my breath. It's been 3 and a half years since Johnson said it wasn't beyond the wit of man to Leave without f**king up the Irish border, and all he's said since is, "Err...well! Yes! Err...as the Romans would have said...err...yes! Technology! We'll err...we'll using the tornado of technology to...err...sweep away the gloom mongers, nay! the NAYSAYERS who...err....yes."
-
and then came out with some cr@p in schoolboy Latin,
truly pathetic
-
Time will tell I have a good feeling that there will be a deal but I’ve been wrong plenty of times🤷♂️
-
Yes I agree but all those are minuscule in comparison to all the reasons for not leaving
Sydney
As a genuine and unloaded question on my part, what would you say are the 5 primary advantages to the UK remaining in the EU that would be impossible for us to introduce as non members?
Tariff free trading with EU countries which I figure is one of the biggest advantages of being a member. The boost to trade with this alone would bury most of any advantages to leaving in financial terms. I think that Austerity will look like a walk on the park compared to what the cost will be over 10 years from point brexit and possibly longer.
The clout the EU has with making deals with non EU countries especially the US, I think Trump wants to separate us from the pack so he can screw us over and force us into a trade deal he could not otherwise implement if we were part of the EU. The tories have already shown us what they think of the NHS and when the treasury has nothing in it it would be just dandy for them to suggest that we can't afford to rebuild this or that hospital but there is this really nice US pharma/med insurance company that wants to help us out.
In Australia a lot of the large infrastructure contracts given to foreign countries/companies include deals where they can ring fence the site and bring in their own cheap labour to build the project, this is partly because we are a stand alone country and partly because the government is hard right wing.
Unlike a lot of brexiters I think that freedom of movement is a benefit to the UK and that the majority of them come to the UK to work hard and earn a living and makes Britain better in so many ways. I do not think that many British farmers and companies will survive without this pool of foreign labour and that the tories or whoever gets power following Brexit will find a way to give them access, in fact I think that most of the things that brexiters want will be denied to them by any incoming governments over time.
I can't give you a definitive list of things that can or cannot be done once any form of brexit happens and neither can the government, no one knows because there is no definitive contract that spells it out but I can hazard a guess that just about everything will cost more except over time British labour which will be screwed over by successive tory governments who will remove safeguards and reduce wages.
Good stuff, thanks Sydney
I’m glad you mentioned tariffs because this is one area where I struggle due to my ignorance of the subject.
A while ago, I read that post Brexit, most imports would be tariff free. After Brexit 87% of imports by value, wouldn’t have a tariff, compared to 80% currently. However, some tariffs would be maintained to protect U.K. industries particularly agricultural. Under the scheme, some imported cars would attract tariffs, but car parts from the EU would remain tariff free to protect the UK car industry.
Also, under current rules only 56% of imports from outside the EU are tariff free and this will increase to 92% post Brexit.
The expectation is that this tariff free facility will be reciprocal with the EU and other countries around the world, something we’re unable to do currently.
Now, in my admittedly novice mind, all of this seems to be good news? What am I missing here?
-
I remember reading about tariffs.. the tariff on imported cars from the EU was going to be 10% - without a brexit deal.
It may well be that there would be fewer tariffs for industry, but for the consumer (ie voters) then some prices would inevitably rise.
So in theory all those leave voters who don’t care about no deal will be hit in the pocket when they buy a new BMW, VW, Fiat, Citroen etc..
-
I remember reading about tariffs.. the tariff on imported cars from the EU was going to be 10% - without a brexit deal.
It may well be that there would be fewer tariffs for industry, but for the consumer (ie voters) then some prices would inevitably rise.
So in theory all those leave voters who don’t care about no deal will be hit in the pocket when they buy a new BMW, VW, Fiat, Citroen etc..
You’re right about imported cars IDM, but for other things such as some fruits & veg, tv’s, & household furnishings they’ll be reduced to a zero tariff. Depends if the retailer passes on the savings though
-
It remains to be seen what deal gets agreed..
-
I remember reading about tariffs.. the tariff on imported cars from the EU was going to be 10% - without a brexit deal.
It may well be that there would be fewer tariffs for industry, but for the consumer (ie voters) then some prices would inevitably rise.
So in theory all those leave voters who don’t care about no deal will be hit in the pocket when they buy a new BMW, VW, Fiat, Citroen etc..
You’re right about imported cars IDM, but for other things such as some fruits & veg, tv’s, & household furnishings they’ll be reduced to a zero tariff. Depends if the retailer passes on the savings though
My fear is HA that it will go just the same way that decimalisation went. Prices went up with growers,wholesalers and retailers all blaming each other. I fear the same again, prices rising even when there is no need. Profiteering and then all the blame goes on Brexit with the man at the bottom suffering the most.
-
OK guys this is your chance, I've just lobbed into Strasbourg would there be any messages you would like me to pass on?
-
No matter how it all turns out Brexit will be blamed for all the negatives and will get no credit for the positives. Even if we end up the richest country in the world it won't be because of Brexit, because we would have been even richer still had we stayed in the EU, according to the Remoaners!
Bad losers never change.
-
OK guys this is your chance, I've just lobbed into Strasbourg would there be any messages you would like me to pass on?
Yes - please ask them why they still insist on the toing and froing of the European Parliament between France and Belgium and all the expense that this creates..
Oh and please tell them to get their collective heads out of the trough.....
-
Yes I agree but all those are minuscule in comparison to all the reasons for not leaving
Sydney
As a genuine and unloaded question on my part, what would you say are the 5 primary advantages to the UK remaining in the EU that would be impossible for us to introduce as non members?
Tariff free trading with EU countries which I figure is one of the biggest advantages of being a member. The boost to trade with this alone would bury most of any advantages to leaving in financial terms. I think that Austerity will look like a walk on the park compared to what the cost will be over 10 years from point brexit and possibly longer.
The clout the EU has with making deals with non EU countries especially the US, I think Trump wants to separate us from the pack so he can screw us over and force us into a trade deal he could not otherwise implement if we were part of the EU. The tories have already shown us what they think of the NHS and when the treasury has nothing in it it would be just dandy for them to suggest that we can't afford to rebuild this or that hospital but there is this really nice US pharma/med insurance company that wants to help us out.
In Australia a lot of the large infrastructure contracts given to foreign countries/companies include deals where they can ring fence the site and bring in their own cheap labour to build the project, this is partly because we are a stand alone country and partly because the government is hard right wing.
Unlike a lot of brexiters I think that freedom of movement is a benefit to the UK and that the majority of them come to the UK to work hard and earn a living and makes Britain better in so many ways. I do not think that many British farmers and companies will survive without this pool of foreign labour and that the tories or whoever gets power following Brexit will find a way to give them access, in fact I think that most of the things that brexiters want will be denied to them by any incoming governments over time.
I can't give you a definitive list of things that can or cannot be done once any form of brexit happens and neither can the government, no one knows because there is no definitive contract that spells it out but I can hazard a guess that just about everything will cost more except over time British labour which will be screwed over by successive tory governments who will remove safeguards and reduce wages.
Good stuff, thanks Sydney
I’m glad you mentioned tariffs because this is one area where I struggle due to my ignorance of the subject.
A while ago, I read that post Brexit, most imports would be tariff free. After Brexit 87% of imports by value, wouldn’t have a tariff, compared to 80% currently. However, some tariffs would be maintained to protect U.K. industries particularly agricultural. Under the scheme, some imported cars would attract tariffs, but car parts from the EU would remain tariff free to protect the UK car industry.
Also, under current rules only 56% of imports from outside the EU are tariff free and this will increase to 92% post Brexit.
The expectation is that this tariff free facility will be reciprocal with the EU and other countries around the world, something we’re unable to do currently.
Now, in my admittedly novice mind, all of this seems to be good news? What am I missing here?
Whether we leave with some sort of deal or not, we will be leaving the Single Market, from an arrangement where the trade between the UK and 27 other countries is completely tariff-free to one where all that same trade will become liable to tariffs. Also, we will lose the FTAs that we have with approx 50-60 other countries that we currently enjoy purely by virtue of our being a member state of the EU, so that all the trade with those countries will be fully liable to tariffs too.
-
I remember reading about tariffs.. the tariff on imported cars from the EU was going to be 10% - without a brexit deal.
It may well be that there would be fewer tariffs for industry, but for the consumer (ie voters) then some prices would inevitably rise.
So in theory all those leave voters who don’t care about no deal will be hit in the pocket when they buy a new BMW, VW, Fiat, Citroen etc..
You’re right about imported cars IDM, but for other things such as some fruits & veg, tv’s, & household furnishings they’ll be reduced to a zero tariff. Depends if the retailer passes on the savings though
Ah, now it sort of makes sense. You've been given the 'We can trade on WTO terms' bullshit, the one where they bank on the audience's ignorance to make it sound like rainbows, unicorns and sunlit uplands.
Yes, we can unilaterally make goods tariff-free if we want to. But under WTO terms we would have to apply the same tariff rate to the same goods from whichever country we import them from - they have to apply universally. Sio we'd have the situation where, for example, imports from China would go from having Anti-Dumping Duty applied in order to stop them flooding our market with artificially low-priced goods (usually state-subsidised to keep the price low ) to a situation where they would not only not have anti-Dumping Duty applied, but also not even the normal Tariff Duty either.
So removing Tariffs on this basis would have two big results:
1. UK industry would be undercut by false competition from lots of directions and lots of businesses will go to the wall; and
2. The Treasury will lose one hell of a big wodge of revenue at a stroke, resulting in higher taxes or a whole new programme of 'austerity'
On top of this, you have to remember there is no reciprocation under WTO rules - even if we make a load of things Tariff-Free, there is absolutely NO obligation on any other country to make our exports to them Tariff-Free at all. Double Whammy.
And as for our agricultural sector, when we leave they will now be outside of the CAP, and therefore they will not be in a position of having Third Country produce attract a Countervailing Duty to stop them being undercut. Instead the UK itself will become a Third Country and so our produce will attract Countervailing Duty on our exports to the EU to stop them undercutting those EU countries still in the CAP. Triple Whammy.
-
What Glyn said he's the man to ask technical questions about tariffs, but we are not going to engineer a better deal with the EU on the outside are we? they can't possibly give us a better deal than their own members. Think how wholesale buyers groups work, they band together to get a better deal from the manufacturers than they could as a single shop or whatever. That will be us after any brexit a single buyer/seller.
-
No matter how it all turns out Brexit will be blamed for all the negatives and will get no credit for the positives. Even if we end up the richest country in the world it won't be because of Brexit, because we would have been even richer still had we stayed in the EU, according to the Remoaners!
Bad losers never change.
So let's summarise your position.
1) Specific bad things were predicted to happen as a direct result of the decision to Leave, even before we actually did leave.
2) Those specific bad things happened.
3) You've consistently refused to accept that those things happened, or, when you have accepted that they happened, you've refused to draw the link between them and the vote (you've blamed them on the 2017 Election, uncertainty due to Remainers blocking Brexit and a general air if mardiness among Remainers).
4) The same economists who (correctly) predicted that bad things would happen as a result of the vote, also predict that worse things will happen when we finally do leave.
5) You refuse to engage with those predictions because, according to you, you can't predict the future.
6) Except that you ARE prepared to predict the future, apparently, when it comes to chucking stupid insults at what people with whom disagree.
You could actually engage with the issues here. But you never do. You just go looking for arguments. Then throw a strop when someone argues back and accuse them if being disrespectful.
-
Also, under current rules only 56% of imports from outside the EU are tariff free and this will increase to 92% post Brexit.
The expectation is that this tariff free facility will be reciprocal with the EU and other countries around the world, something we’re unable to do currently.
Now, in my admittedly novice mind, all of this seems to be good news? What am I missing here?
That's right Herbert, the May government did make a proposal to drop most import tariffs in the expectation that other countries would do the same.
They, like you, appeared to miss the obvious point that the value of tariffs is a major bargaining point in trade deals - and if the UK is reducing its tariffs by default there is no reason for any other country to do the same - as they have already got what they want.
Thus after Brexit we will have a worse trade deal with Canada than we have now.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1148480/brexit-news-uk-eu-trade-agreement-canada-justin-trudeau-liam-fox-no-deal-brexit-latest
They, like you, missed the
-
No matter how it all turns out Brexit will be blamed for all the negatives and will get no credit for the positives. Even if we end up the richest country in the world it won't be because of Brexit, because we would have been even richer still had we stayed in the EU, according to the Remoaners!
Bad losers never change.
So let's summarise your position.
1) Specific bad things were predicted to happen as a direct result of the decision to Leave, even before we actually did leave.
2) Those specific bad things happened.
3) You've consistently refused to accept that those things happened, or, when you have accepted that they happened, you've refused to draw the link between them and the vote (you've blamed them on the 2017 Election, uncertainty due to Remainers blocking Brexit and a general air if mardiness among Remainers).
4) The same economists who (correctly) predicted that bad things would happen as a result of the vote, also predict that worse things will happen when we finally do leave.
5) You refuse to engage with those predictions because, according to you, you can't predict the future.
6) Except that you ARE prepared to predict the future, apparently, when it comes to chucking stupid insults at what people with whom disagree.
You could actually engage with the issues here. But you never do. You just go looking for arguments. Then throw a strop when someone argues back and accuse them if being disrespectful.
1) We still haven't left yet!
2) No, they didn't when the 'experts' said they would.
3) If I remember correctly I asked if it was possible that our economy might have been affected by the General Election. I never personally said that it had. Perhaps you should have another look and apologise accordingly.
As for me accepting there has been an economic drop since the Brexit vote, I've NEVER said otherwise! Everyone and I mean both Remainers and Leavers expected an initial slump in the economy after the leave vote because of the uncertainty of the future. We still have uncertainty about the future because three years later we still haven't left!
4) Everyone expected that a leave vote would initially have a negative effect.
5) I never said you can't predict the future. I run a competition to find out who's the best at it! What I'm saying is there are no experts at it, especially when referring to something that has never happened before
6) What insults? Do you mean like calling people stupid petulant thick racist berks? YOU, BST should have gone and had a long think about yourself before you of all people called someone else disrespectful..
-
Wilts, I'm really at a loss to understand how many ppl think that by reducing our buying power by a magnitude of 27 countries admittedly some of them small that this could possibly benefit the UK, the mere fact that trump wants us to leave should sound alarm bells. Look at the countries that want a piece of the EU like Turkey, why would a country that which is now a virtual dictatorship want to join the EU if it thought it was going to lose or take back control
-
BB
Right. Now we get to the core of this obsession of yours.
Tell you what. Find a single example of me calling anyone stupid, racist or thick in the absence of any supporting evidence.
-
I never said I was referring to you about those comments, but they are examples of some of the things I've been called by those who, like you, are as sour in defeat as the Cowley brothers.
Your line of personal insult is more of the tight old bas**rd leavers type who should now be dead.
-
In the interest of ending this feud or reducing the intensity then you could show us who you are referring to because it you seem to be using a very broad brush bb.
-
In response to your other points.
1) Jesus wept...
2) Yes. They. Did. The economic experts predicted a sharp devaluation, a spike in inflation, falling real wages as a result, a sharp reduction in foreign investment, an ongoing productivity slump and a sharp economic slowdown. Every one of those things happened. They were predicted to happen not because of uncertainty, but because of the high likelihood that ANY form of Brexit would lead to a weaker economic future. The only uncertainty is whether it is going to be bad or very bad. If there was a likely upside, there would be many companies who would be investing heavily on the chance of making a killing by getting in ahead of the pack.
3) Those predictions were demonstrably correct. And now you're at it again, saying it is due to uncertainty, which you yourself blame if Remainers blocking Brexit. You've also regularly suggested that we've struggled after the Vote because of Remainers' moaning about the outcome instead of knuckling down. What you have never once done is accept that the bad things that happened in 2 were predictable and predicted by straightforward economic analysis.
4) So you flatly contradict your response to 2...
5) What you have constantly done is to refuse to engage with the overwhelming consensus of people who spend their lives analysing these things and have a long track record of being right. You simply dismiss them as being of no importance. And then you make smart arse remarks about other people's supposed bad faith.
-
Nice backtracking BB. Throw out an implied accusation, get called out on it and then say "I never meant you."
Pathetic.
-
SydneyRover. In the interest of not adding fuel to the fire, I suggest you stay out of this. If you want to know read the threads yourself.
-
Backtracking? f**k me! Read question 6. That is what the answer referred to!
-
In the interest of not adding fuel to the fire, I suggest you stay out of this. If you want to know read the threads yourself.
Not buying it bb, put up or shut up I think is the correct term here.
-
I'm sure your leader will be well pleased with your attempts at bailing him out! Well done Syderney!
-
Still not buying it bb, you can talk the talk but you're legless.
-
In response to your other points.
1) Jesus wept...
2) Yes. They. Did. The economic experts predicted a sharp devaluation, a spike in inflation, falling real wages as a result, a sharp reduction in foreign investment, an ongoing productivity slump and a sharp economic slowdown. Every one of those things happened. They were predicted to happen not because of uncertainty, but because of the high likelihood that ANY form of Brexit would lead to a weaker economic future. The only uncertainty is whether it is going to be bad or very bad. If there was a likely upside, there would be many companies who would be investing heavily on the chance of making a killing by getting in ahead of the pack.
3) Those predictions were demonstrably correct. And now you're at it again, saying it is due to uncertainty, which you yourself blame if Remainers blocking Brexit. You've also regularly suggested that we've struggled after the Vote because of Remainers' moaning about the outcome instead of knuckling down. What you have never once done is accept that the bad things that happened in 2 were predictable and predicted by straightforward economic analysis.
4) So you flatly contradict your response to 2...
5) What you have constantly done is to refuse to engage with the overwhelming consensus of people who spend their lives analysing these things and have a long track record of being right. You simply dismiss them as being of no importance. And then you make smart arse remarks about other people's supposed bad faith.
No. What I've constantly done is supported democracy. The result of the referendum being carried out far outweighs the financial consequences in terms of importance any day.
-
BB / BST:
Please don't kill this interesting thread with a personal slanging match - take those messages to the PM's if you must.
Thanks.
-
The result of the referendum being carried out far outweighs the financial consequences in terms of importance any day.
100% disagree. So many valid opinions that the referendum was floored and the preceding campaigns were borderline illegal, no way should one referendum kill an economy for generations to come. Pretty thoughtless statement that BB, IMO.
-
BJW. It is your democratic right to disagree with the result of a democratic vote, but how long will you have such a democratic right if we do away with democracy by not honouring them?
-
I don’t think BJW was saying he disagrees with the referendum result. He says it was flawed.. he also didn’t point the finger at either of the campaigns directly.
No one can ignore the result, but it is equally as democratic to challenge something which isn’t working, and we think about it and vote if necessary. Note that I don’t specifically mean leave vs remain, but more about getting a satisfactory deal to leave the EU as best suits the country moving forward. Ultimately that could lead to another remain option, but let’s see if brexit can actually be managed first.
To me, no deal isn’t an option as an outcome, regardless if it is used as a bargaining tool..
I’m sorry BB (and Admin) bit your response o BJW is typical of how things can be twisted and distorted..
-
IDM. I asked BJW a question. What am I twisting or distorting?
-
BJW didn't say the result of a referendum isn't democratic, he was saying the way that particular referendum was conducted wasn't democratic and in his eyes invalidates the result. But as usual you twisted and distorted what he was saying so you could ignore it.
-
IDM. I asked BJW a question. What am I twisting or distorting?
Read BJW’s post again carefully, then look at yours..
Nowhere did BJW mention the referendum result, nor disrespecting democracy, yet you used that argument to respond and to pose your question..
-
BJW was responding to my comment about the referendum result, so I assume that is what he is referring to. I never said he disrespected democracy, I asked him what the consequences of disrespecting the vote by ignoring it would be.
-
In response to your other points.
1) Jesus wept...
2) Yes. They. Did. The economic experts predicted a sharp devaluation, a spike in inflation, falling real wages as a result, a sharp reduction in foreign investment, an ongoing productivity slump and a sharp economic slowdown. Every one of those things happened. They were predicted to happen not because of uncertainty, but because of the high likelihood that ANY form of Brexit would lead to a weaker economic future. The only uncertainty is whether it is going to be bad or very bad. If there was a likely upside, there would be many companies who would be investing heavily on the chance of making a killing by getting in ahead of the pack.
3) Those predictions were demonstrably correct. And now you're at it again, saying it is due to uncertainty, which you yourself blame if Remainers blocking Brexit. You've also regularly suggested that we've struggled after the Vote because of Remainers' moaning about the outcome instead of knuckling down. What you have never once done is accept that the bad things that happened in 2 were predictable and predicted by straightforward economic analysis.
4) So you flatly contradict your response to 2...
5) What you have constantly done is to refuse to engage with the overwhelming consensus of people who spend their lives analysing these things and have a long track record of being right. You simply dismiss them as being of no importance. And then you make smart arse remarks about other people's supposed bad faith.
No. What I've constantly done is supported democracy. The result of the referendum being carried out far outweighs the financial consequences in terms of importance any day.
BB You do say the daftest things at times, and this is your daftest yet!
Do you actually understand what democracy is?
-
BJW. It is your democratic right to disagree with the result of a democratic vote, but how long will you have such a democratic right if we do away with democracy by not honouring them?
We aren't doing away with democracy though. The referendum wasn't legally binding; so legally it was just there to gauge public opinion. If you as a constituent then feel your representative (MP) in parliament isn't doing their job and/or aren't representing you, you don't vote for them in the next election. THAT is a parliamentary democracy, which isn't being damaged by Brexit at all.
The suggestion that parliament ignoring a non-binding referendum means democracy is dying is very naive / garbage.
-
I think so NNK. In fear of being daft again, I'll keep my idea of it to myself for now. Perhaps a properly educated bloke like you can offer the correct definition?
-
BJW. It is your democratic right to disagree with the result of a democratic vote, but how long will you have such a democratic right if we do away with democracy by not honouring them?
We aren't doing away with democracy though. The referendum wasn't legally binding; so legally it was just there to gauge public opinion. If you as a constituent then feel your representative (MP) in parliament isn't doing their job and/or aren't representing you, you don't vote for them in the next election. THAT is a parliamentary democracy, which isn't being damaged by Brexit at all.
The suggestion that parliament ignoring a non-binding referendum means democracy is dying is very naive / garbage.
In that case, David Cameron is a liar then.
If you think there won't be repercussions on a major scale if the result isn't carried out I reckon you are the one being very naive.
-
Wasn’t BJW’s initial point about the effect of the referendum vs the economy.?? Not about the result being carried out or not.?
-
Tell you what IDM, ask BJW himself!
-
The David Cameron who has been accused of running a campaign dubbed Project Fear and who said he would stay on as PM whatever the referendum result - and then resigned the day after loosing. That David Cameron you think might be a liar?
-
I think so NNK. In fear of being daft again, I'll keep my idea of it to myself for now. Perhaps a properly educated bloke like you can offer the correct definition?
I think Abraham Lincoln summed it up rather well in his Gettysburg Address
government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth
It is that third part 'for the people' that is vitally important, that is - any decision taken should be in the interests of the people as a whole. Now, can you tell me why you think making the majority of the people in the UK less well off whilst also limiting their ability to live and work anywhere in the EU is in their interests?
Oh, and I'd honestly be interested in your idea of what 'democracy' is.
-
Tell you what IDM, ask BJW himself!
No need, I understood it in the first place.. you either didn’t, or are determined to take the argument down your own track..
Look BB, I have no personal gripe with you and I have no issue with the referendum result itself. Neither do I care much for party politics.
What I do want to see, is an outcome that is best for the country as a whole.. if that means Brexit, then let’s do it properly even if it takes longer.. if it can’t be done, then the public needs to be asked if it really wants no deal..
No twisting, no blame, no politicking..
-
The David Cameron who has been accused of running a campaign dubbed Project Fear and who said he would stay on as PM whatever the referendum result - and then resigned the day after loosing. That David Cameron you think might be a liar?
That's the one!
-
Fascinating int it?
Calling for a vote on a specific and clear question is an affront to democracy.
Having a vote where no-one really knew what the question was, the winning side broke the law on multiple points, then the winners said, "Nothing to do with the people any more, WE will decide what the vote meant" is such an ideal democratic process that it must never be challenged, even if that means our grandkids inherit a much poorer country.
Strange days we live in.
-
Tell you what IDM, ask BJW himself!
No need, I understood it in the first place.. you either didn’t, or are determined to take the argument down your own track..
Look BB, I have no personal gripe with you and I have no issue with the referendum result itself. Neither do I care much for party politics.
What I do want to see, is an outcome that is best for the country as a whole.. if that means Brexit, then let’s do it properly even if it takes longer.. if it can’t be done, then the public needs to be asked if it really wants no deal..
No twisting, no blame, no politicking..
IDM. I've said countless times that my opinion counts for nothing in the scheme of things. It's never been a case of convincing me, it's all about convincing other far more determined people who might insist on democracy being carried out or face the consequences.
-
I'm sure it's unintended, but that sounds very much like you're making a case for violent response there BB.
If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'd want to correct me clearly and unambiguously.
-
Only you would think of that BST. When Enoch gave his Rivers of Blood speech I doubt anybody thought he was condoning it.
-
Interesting response.
Powell's speech did have the effect of encouraging violence whether he meant that or not. He could have chosen to explicitly clarify what his actual position was. And he chose never to do that. Which is, well, irresponsible at best.
-
I think so NNK. In fear of being daft again, I'll keep my idea of it to myself for now. Perhaps a properly educated bloke like you can offer the correct definition?
I think Abraham Lincoln summed it up rather well in his Gettysburg Address
government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth
It is that third part 'for the people' that is vitally important, that is - any decision taken should be in the interests of the people as a whole. Now, can you tell me why you think making the majority of the people in the UK less well off whilst also limiting their ability to live and work anywhere in the EU is in their interests?
Oh, and I'd honestly be interested in your idea of what 'democracy' is.
Cat got your tongue BB?
-
Interesting response.
Powell's speech did have the effect of encouraging violence whether he meant that or not. He could have chosen to explicitly clarify what his actual position was. And he chose never to do that. Which is, well, irresponsible at best.
Do you honestly believe that people with the inclination to such as even think that Powell would condone violence would have believed him anyway?
Likewise, if you believe that I would condone violence what would be the point in denying it? Would you believe me?
-
I think so NNK. In fear of being daft again, I'll keep my idea of it to myself for now. Perhaps a properly educated bloke like you can offer the correct definition?
I think Abraham Lincoln summed it up rather well in his Gettysburg Address
government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth
It is that third part 'for the people' that is vitally important, that is - any decision taken should be in the interests of the people as a whole. Now, can you tell me why you think making the majority of the people in the UK less well off whilst also limiting their ability to live and work anywhere in the EU is in their interests?
Oh, and I'd honestly be interested in your idea of what 'democracy' is.
Cat got your tongue BB?
Why don't you ask the majority of the people who voted to leave? I'm sure they wouldn't agree with your theory of doom and gloom. They'd just call you a whinging bad loser who believes in democracy as long as you get your own way.
It is because of people like you why I would now change my vote to leave. I just don't want to be on your side!
-
I think so NNK. In fear of being daft again, I'll keep my idea of it to myself for now. Perhaps a properly educated bloke like you can offer the correct definition?
I think Abraham Lincoln summed it up rather well in his Gettysburg Address
government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth
It is that third part 'for the people' that is vitally important, that is - any decision taken should be in the interests of the people as a whole. Now, can you tell me why you think making the majority of the people in the UK less well off whilst also limiting their ability to live and work anywhere in the EU is in their interests?
Oh, and I'd honestly be interested in your idea of what 'democracy' is.
Cat got your tongue BB?
Why don't you ask the majority of the people who voted to leave? I'm sure they wouldn't agree with your theory of doom and gloom. They'd just call you a whinging bad loser who believes in democracy as long as you get your own way.
It is because of people like you why I would now change my vote to leave. I just don't want to be on your side!
Obfuscation as usual from you BB. You act like a WUM with your posts, and it's quite obvious you deliberately avoid answering simple questions - says everything about you BB, sadly.
But go on, tell us what you think democracy is; and while you're at it tell us why you think your idea of democracy is worth making us all poorer - but of course, you can't; so you'll obfuscate some more!
-
BB
I would believe you. Of course I would. I've no reason whatsoever to assume you'd be lying.
It's when you post stuff that is very easy to read either way that I struggle to figure out what you mean, and consequently I might reach the wrong honest conclusion.
-
If you find my view unclear it says more about you than it does me.
Time and time and time again I've explained my view. I'll explain it one last time.
I voted to remain.
Leave won, so as far as I was concerned we were all leavers.
Some of the remain voters kicked up such a stink about losing that they became known as Remoaners.
I no longer wanted to be part of that lot and vowed to vote Leave if we were forced to have another referendum.
To me, democracy is majority rule. If the majority rules on a vote, that vote should be carried out. if that vote is overruled before it has been implemented, it is not democracy.
-
BB
I would believe you. Of course I would. I've no reason whatsoever to assume you'd be lying.
It's when you post stuff that is very easy to read either way that I struggle to figure out what you mean, and consequently I might reach the wrong honest conclusion.
That says more about the state of your mind than mine.
-
If you find my view unclear it says more about you than it does me.
Time and time and time again I've explained my view. I'll explain it one last time.
I voted to remain.
Leave won, so as far as I was concerned we were all leavers.
Some of the remain voters kicked up such a stink about losing that they became known as Remoaners.
I no longer wanted to be part of that lot and vowed to vote Leave if we were forced to have another referendum.
To me, democracy is majority rule. If the majority rules on a vote, that vote should be carried out. if that vote is overruled before it has been implemented, it is not democracy.
And with this one statement you show that you haven't got the first clue as to what 'democracy' actually means!
-
I get all that BB.
But none of that explains what you meant by "it's all about convincing other far more determined people who might insist on democracy being carried out or face the consequences."
But given our slap from the Admin last night, if you don't want to talk about that, I'm not going to push it.
-
I mean it's not about convincing me that not leaving the EU would be democratic. I doubt I'd ever be convinced of that. The difference is it doesn't really matter a fig what I think because I wouldn't break the law by rioting or whatever because of it. I do believe, however, that there are plenty of people who would. That,I believe would be the consequence of not leaving the EU.
-
And you would unreservedly condemn that?
-
Of course I would! More to the point, would you condemn people rioting to remain?
-
Thank you. That could have been cleared up 6 hours ago.
Me? Of course I would.
-
So you've waited 6 hours to find out whether I'm a potential rioter or not!
-
No, we've waited 3 years for you to confirm you're as contrary as ever.'
-
No BB.
I nobody ever raised the question of you rioting.
It was about whether you would unequivocally condemn people who advocated or committed violence if Brexit doesn't happen. You strongly said that some Leave supporters would dole out "consequences" in those circumstances and you've spent three years telling us that your sympathies are with the Leave voters. So I'm sure you can see where the potential for misunderstanding comes in.
Glad we've cleared it up. We can move on.
-
I do sympathise with the Leave voters, that's why I'd become one if we had another vote. That doesn't mean to say I think that all Leave voters are wonderful level headed citizens though. I also sympathise with you for having people like SydneyRover on your side, but I wouldn't hold you personally responsible for it.
-
Thomas Cook blaming Brexit for them going bust.
-
If you find my view unclear it says more about you than it does me.
Time and time and time again I've explained my view. I'll explain it one last time.
I voted to remain.
Leave won, so as far as I was concerned we were all leavers.
Some of the remain voters kicked up such a stink about losing that they became known as Remoaners.
I no longer wanted to be part of that lot and vowed to vote Leave if we were forced to have another referendum.
To me, democracy is majority rule. If the majority rules on a vote, that vote should be carried out. if that vote is overruled before it has been implemented, it is not democracy.
Surely you would vote on your perception of the issues behind the choices being offered, rather than any disassociation with subsets of voter groups.?
Also, surely in a democracy there is, or at least should be, a democratic method for a review, or changing your mind, or looking again at something which isn’t working.?
We get that with our general elections. Or do you believe that since the Tories/DUP won a small majority last time, that they should stay in government forever.?
Note again, for the severalth time, that I am not necessarily saying that this would give Remain a way out, more that the whole electorate can re-think things.
It had been too long since the referendum - the government at the time should have invoked article 50 immediately after the vote, and spent the two years getting a suitable deal instead of party politicking and infighting.
-
It would be great to leave with a good deal, although without a no-deal option I doubt we would get one as good. Either way, we should leave, and remain shouldn't even be an option because we voted against remaining.
-
Nor should no deal..
A couple of questions left unanswered too..
-
Isn't it ever so democratic when you want to refuse to let voters have the opportunity to change their mind!
-
I'm not aware of any rules forbidding a future referendum should we deem it necessary following a reasonable length of time out of the EU. By reasonable I mean enough time to prove to leave voters that they were wrong, and enough to change their minds in another democratic referendum.
I don't think doom-mongering now to force the the 2016 referendum to be cancelled before we have actually left yet is quite the same thing!
-
The best leave deal we could possibly get is retaining everything we have now, except for this loony self centred government.
-
It would be great to leave with a good deal, although without a no-deal option I doubt we would get one as good. Either way, we should leave, and remain shouldn't even be an option because we voted against remaining.
There are three issues to be sorted in the withdrawal agreement:
1 financial obligations of the UK
2 rights of EU citizens in the UK & UK citizens in the EU
3 how to avoid north/south checks across the Irish border thus breaching the Good Friday Peace Agreement
In you view what would be a good deal to decide those issues?
How would threatening to leave with no-deal help that - given that all these three issues have to be decided at some point?
-
I assume we would leave with no financial obligations if there was no agreement, and the EU would insist on a hard border. I doubt the EU would want either of those things to happen.
-
If you're going to be any use whatsoever in negotiations, it's imperative that you understand the mentality of the other side. I do appreciate that the Brexit supporters don't very often seem to consider that people over the Channel count in this process, and have certain red lines of their own, but they do.
Let's have a think.
If we left with no deal, refused to pay tens of billions of pounds for agreements that we had already contracted to pay for, and seriously damaged the economy (and social stability) of a particular EU member, how do you think the EU would respond?
Do you think they'd shrug their shoulders and then start talking to us about a trade deal with favourable terms for us? Or do you think they would pull up the drawbridge and tell us to f**k off, and trade with them (47% of all our international trade) on terms that would be highly detrimental to us?
Anyone who thinks it's the first really needs an adult with them to make sure they don't hurt themselves.
The reality is that we would suffer a massive economic hit, and forego any possibility of having any friendly relationship with the EU for the foreseeable future. Look at it this way: if another country had entered into contractual agreements with us which required them to pay us £40bn, and they told us to b*llocks and implemented a policy that caused economic carnage and social unrest in Yorkshire, would you expect the UK Govt to extend the hand of friendship to them? Wars have started over less.
For all those reasons, and despite the puffed up opinions of the Little Englanders, threatening to leave with No Deal has NEVER been realistic. It is an insult to everyone's intelligence to think that a negotiating stance that says, "Give us what we want or we'll self-harm and you'll have a mess to clean up" is in any way credible. But it has just struck me. Those who advocate that approach do increasingly sound like the sort of spoilt and petulant teenagers who would argue like that.
-
Iceland eventually coughed up on monies owed.
''Britain has been fully reimbursed for Icesave bank collapse, Iceland says''
A final payment of £374m ends the legal and diplomatic saga sparked when the online savings banks collapsed and froze UK deposits worth billions
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/13/britain-has-been-fully-reimbursed-for-icesave-bank-collapse-iceland-says
-
If only it was just a question of leaving with a deal or leaving with no deal it would probably have been settled one way or the other by now. But it isn't. Parliament, with the backing of some of the UK public, want neither. They want us to remain, even though the 2016 referendum voted not to remain.
-
Again that is not
If only it was just a question of leaving with a deal or leaving with no deal it would probably have been settled one way or the other by now. But it isn't. Parliament, with the backing of some of the UK public, want neither. They want us to remain, even though the 2016 referendum voted not to remain.
Again this has come up several times and it is not true.
The vast majority of MP's have voted to leave - they just can't agree what the terms of leaving would be. The vast majority of Tory MP's voted for May's deal at the third reading. The vast majority of Labour MP's voted for a Customs Union & the Common Market 2.0 (the SNP also voted for this) in the indicative votes.
It might not be your idea of 'leaving' but well over 500 MP's have voted to leave. To state otherwise is just plain wrong.
-
BB.
That is just factually wrong. Flat wrong. I cannot understand why you, an intelligent person, cannot see that.
If the ERG had voted for May's deal, it would have passed in March.
That's a fact.
The third meaningful vote on the May Deal was defeated 286-344. So clearly there were 286 MPs who voted FOR a Brexit, and actually a Brexit that was far harder than anyone on the Leave side postulated in 2016.
But. Of the ones who voted against that deal, not all of them did so because they didn't want Brexit at all.
The 10 DUP members all want Brexit. They voted against that deal. And the following 28 Tory MPs voted against the deal, despite publicly and very vociferously being in favour of Brexit.
Afriye
Baker
Baron
Bone
Braverman
Bridgen
Cash
Chope
Duddridge
Francois
Fysh
Hollobone
Holloway
Jayawardena
Jones
Jenkin
Jenkyns
Lewis
Lopez
Mackinlay
Morris
Patel
Paterson
Redwood
Robertson
Rosindell
Rowley
Villiers
So, in that vote, there were actually 324 MPs who voted for May's deal OR who voted against it but are actually on record as being strongly pro-Brexit, against 306 others.
So the facts are unarguable. In March, there was a comfortable majority of MPs who supported Brexit.
That fact that Brexit didn't happen was due to the manoeuvring of 38 of the Far Right Brexit supporting MPs. Had those 38 voted for May's deal, we'd have left the EU on 29 March and there would have been nothing that any Remain-supporting or Ref 2-supporting MP could have done about it.
So now BB, you need to stop making that stupid, fatuous and factually incorrect claim that Remainers stopped Brexit.
-
Official figures eh! It would be interesting, albeit impossible to find out how many of those 'leavers' were voting tactically when they voted against May's deal in order to stop Brexit.
Corbyn's promise of a new referendum, if he wins the election, won't help in the attempts to strike a deal either. Likewise the Lib Dems similar pledge. The EU only has to stall Brexit in the hope of this happening along with a resultant remain outcome to achieve their objective of us staying in the union.
Life-long leaver Corbyn will do anything to gain power, even if it means remaining! If the country had unity and respect for the original referendum Corbyn and co would have no one to represent regarding remaining, and the EU would feel far less nonchalant in their approach to striking a deal.
-
Wot's that u say bst, you mean it's not down to the remoaners?
-
BB
You're making a fool of yourself now.
Go and look up what those Tory MPs I listed, and the DUP MPs' stances are on Brexit.
You don't HAVE to argue against stone cold facts. You can choose to do, but you're going to look stupid if you do.
-
You and your handful of supporters no doubt do think I'm a fool. Nay bother! I'm glad to hear it. I'd hate yo think I was on the same side as you.
-
I thought the Admin wanted you to stick to the issues.?
-
Strange, wasn't that long ago when we would hear in the yellow press how we were disliked by citizens of some EU countries and they thought it would be better if we left the EU, now all we seem to hear is the EU is underhandedly trying to keep us in.
-
I thought the Admin wanted you to stick to the issues.?
Being on the same side as BST would be an issue.
-
You can agree sometimes you know, you don’t always have to be contrary for the sake of it..
would you change your own beliefs and views just to avoid being seen to agree with BST, for example.?
-
I don't think anyone is a fool with them offering reason to think that.
I do worry though, about anyone who refuses to accept stone cold facts that contradict what they would like the world to be like.
I'm probably going to be accused of being condescending again, but I always find it better to start with established facts and draw your conclusions from them, than to start with conclusions and ignore any facts that don't support them.
-
You can agree sometimes you know, you don’t always have to be contrary for the sake of it..
would you change your own beliefs and views just to avoid being seen to agree with BST, for example.?
I've agreed with BST a few times. Show me ONE example on any forum where he's agreed with me.
-
You can agree sometimes you know, you don’t always have to be contrary for the sake of it..
would you change your own beliefs and views just to avoid being seen to agree with BST, for example.?
I've agreed with BST a few times. Show me ONE example on any forum where he's agreed with me.
I’m not saying he has or hasn’t... my point applies to BST too, and to anyone really..
But I have only read you saying you change your view to avoid being seen to agree with others..
That’s me trying to bring the thread back to brexit too..
-
no he doesn't
-
Right. This is getting weird. I'm out.
-
Me too. Bye!
-
Anyway..
Will be watching to see if the government actually
Comes forward with tangible Brexit deal proposals in the coming days.. we can then have something worthy of debate..
-
Exavtly, we have a government saying they'll propose a deal then not and an opposition saying they'll have a referendum on their deal that they may or may not support because they dont know what will be in that deal.
Certainty eh?
-
Exavtly, we have a government saying they'll propose a deal then not and an opposition saying they'll have a referendum on their deal that they may or may not support because they dont know what will be in that deal.
Certainty eh?
#takingbackcontrol
-
You can agree sometimes you know, you don’t always have to be contrary for the sake of it..
would you change your own beliefs and views just to avoid being seen to agree with BST, for example.?
NAIL/HEAD! It has taken three years to finally come clean about the real motive for his pathetic petulant arguing. Finally, twice in the last 24 hours he's said he would hate to find himself on the same side as BST. What is sad is that he thinks it actually needed him to say it for the rest of us to know. We've known for years BB.
-
''Ireland will not accept ‘halfway house’ Brexit deal, says Varadkar
Taoiseach dismisses reports the State will come under EU pressure to compromise''
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has rejected reports Ireland will come under pressure from larger EU countries to change its stance over Brexit, warning that he will not accept a “halfway house” deal.
Speaking in New York ahead of a meeting with British prime minister Boris Johnson, Mr Varadkar said while some people may believe that Ireland would “somehow fold or give up our position” on Brexit, “that’s not going to happen”.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-will-not-accept-halfway-house-brexit-deal-says-varadkar-1.4027765
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49789938 so labour will wait and see which side they will back couldn’t make it up
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49789938 so labour will wait and see which side they will back couldn’t make it up
You're spot on there bp
-
so labour will wait and see which side they will back
a certain Tory MP did that prior to the referendum...
-
Yes bob and that is shocking 2
-
so labour will wait and see which side they will back
a certain Tory MP did that prior to the referendum...
Wey-hey!
Brilliant! That's Corbyn's response to Johnson's criticism in a Leaders' Debate.
-
Bpool.
I originally thought it was a stupid policy from Labour but it's growing on me.
They are saying to Remain supporters, you WILL get Ref2.
They are saying to Leave supporters, you WILL get a credible Leave option that doesn't involve us kneecapping ourselves.
They are saying to the entire country: This is a f**king mess. The country is horribly split. Parliament is horribly split. Parties are horribly split. We have no right as a party to tell you what to do. We had a referendum where no-one knew the consequences, and it's turned out to be impossible to implement the outcome because the outcome wasn't specific enough. Now it will be specific. And we'll let you choose without us hectoring you as a party.
-
Bpool.
I originally thought it was a stupid policy from Labour but it's growing on me.
They are saying to Remain supporters, you WILL get Ref2.
They are saying to Leave supporters, you WILL get a credible Leave option that doesn't involve us kneecapping ourselves.
They are saying to the entire country: This is a f**king mess. The country is horribly split. Parliament is horribly split. Parties are horribly split. We have no right as a party to tell you what to do. We had a referendum where no-one knew the consequences, and it's turned out to be impossible to implement the outcome because the outcome wasn't specific enough. Now it will be specific. And we'll let you choose without us hectoring you as a party.
It might be the stuff of great Socratic debate BST, but does the average voter care enough to try and get their head round it?
-
Bpool.
I originally thought it was a stupid policy from Labour but it's growing on me.
They are saying to Remain supporters, you WILL get Ref2.
They are saying to Leave supporters, you WILL get a credible Leave option that doesn't involve us kneecapping ourselves.
They are saying to the entire country: This is a f**king mess. The country is horribly split. Parliament is horribly split. Parties are horribly split. We have no right as a party to tell you what to do. We had a referendum where no-one knew the consequences, and it's turned out to be impossible to implement the outcome because the outcome wasn't specific enough. Now it will be specific. And we'll let you choose without us hectoring you as a party.
It might be the stuff of great Socratic debate BST, but does the average voter care enough to try and get their head round it?
That rather depends on how much intelligence you credit them with.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49807401 Is that banks clear of all charges now?
-
No - the judgement very specifically says he's not clear of all charges. It refuses to comment on other investigations, which is telling.
-
No - the judgement very specifically says he's not clear of all charges. It refuses to comment on other investigations, which is telling.
thanks mate was working and only had a quick look
-
Bpool.
I originally thought it was a stupid policy from Labour but it's growing on me.
They are saying to Remain supporters, you WILL get Ref2.
They are saying to Leave supporters, you WILL get a credible Leave option that doesn't involve us kneecapping ourselves.
They are saying to the entire country: This is a f**king mess. The country is horribly split. Parliament is horribly split. Parties are horribly split. We have no right as a party to tell you what to do. We had a referendum where no-one knew the consequences, and it's turned out to be impossible to implement the outcome because the outcome wasn't specific enough. Now it will be specific. And we'll let you choose without us hectoring you as a party.
This is how I've seen it and for me it's the only option that could unite the country.
-
Surely we now have to ask for an extension to Brexit simply to allow time get our own government in order.?
Boris has to resign, so there would then be time to choose a new Tory leader, and then, it’s time for a General Election.
After we have chosen the next government, then we can go back to the EU with deal proposals.
Why would the EU trust Johnson or his government now.?
-
Give it Ken Clarke till end of the season.
-
Boris wont resign nor should he..He should call a general election and maybe this time the opposition partys might go for it..Boris/tory's v Corbyn/labour with the lib dems thrown in...That's the first vote the people should decide....
-
Please explain why you think he shouldn’t resign.?
He’s ridden roughshod over parliamentary procedures, and the highest court in the land has declared his actions unlawful.
What’s to say he wouldn’t do that again, whether for Brexit or any other issue.?
Why would the EU trust him or his representative now.?
He has flushed his own credibility down the toilet, he has to go..
-
Boris Johnson should be impeached if he breaks law, says Plaid Cymru
Frances Perraudin
Plaid Cymru’s Westminster Leader, Liz Saville Roberts, said opposition party leaders should be ready to impeach Boris Johnson if he failed to request an extension to article 50 to avoid a no deal Brexit. She said:
Boris Johnson has already driven a bulldozer through the constitution, so no longer are ideas like impeachment farfetched. I will tell other opposition party leaders, we need to be ready to impeach Boris Johnson if he breaks the law.
In 2004, Boris Johnson supported an attempt to impeach Tony Blair over the Iraq war, co-signing a motion tabled by current Plaid Cymru leader Adam Price.
Writing in a column for The Telegraph at the time, Johnson said that Blair deserved to be impeached because he had “treated Parliament and the public with contempt”. Saville Roberts said:
Impeachment was a process backed by Boris Johnson not so long ago. A man sacked for serially lying backed the impeachment of Blair for the same reason – lying. If the prime minister becomes a law-breaker, we have an even stronger case for impeachment than the very cause he advocated back in 2004.
A spokesman for Plaid Cymru said the party’s priority was to deliver a people’s vote, not a general election, and that they would vote against any motion of no confidence. “Parliament must be sitting whilst the extension [to article 50] is secured, which means beyond the European Council meeting scheduled between the 14th to the 19th October,” he said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/sep/24/brexit-supreme-court-latest-news-labour-conference-starmer-says-it-is-obvious-labour-will-back-remain-despite-conference-vote-live-news
-
A spokesman for Plaid Cymru said the party’s priority was to deliver a people’s vote, not a general election, and that they would vote against any motion of no confidence. “Parliament must be sitting whilst the extension [to article 50] is secured, which means beyond the European Council meeting scheduled between the 14th to the 19th October,” he said.
Here you have the point that will divide the opposition, which is of course united in celebrating the SC decision today. It is why I expect that Boris Johnson will still be in No. 10 this time next week, and probably this time next month.
If you ask Jeremy Corbyn, he will say he wants a GE as soon as the extension to Article 50 is secured. I'm far from convinced that all his MPs are on the same page.
In the meantime expect Johnson to start making overtures to the Tory MPs he stripped of the Party Whip. If Dominic Cummings' head is the price to be paid for that, then it's bye, bye Dom. (To be honest, his strategies and tactics have proved pretty useless, and Johnson would probably be well rid of him).
-
And here we go... The SNP are calling for an immediate vote of no-confidence but there is already a question about whether one will actually be called. Labour concerned about the splits in their ranks being further exposed perhaps?
-
He shouldn't resign simply because of the turmoil that would create in the short term above it is now...Let the people decide if they trust him to run the Country.These calls for him to resign are equally about opportunity for the Scots,Welsh and Labour.
We can have a g/e in a matter of weeks and put an end to this one way or another..I'm tired of the lot of them,remainers smugly sitting in the house of commons claiming they are ready to get back to work with selfies..Oh Really we've had nothing but squabbling,back stabbing,treachery from the lot of them for 3 years..They've achieved absolutely nothing so the week that they have had off has made no difference...
I appreciate most of you are remainers and every little opportunity to disrupt brexit you are seizing upon to cry foul..i'm tired of every party and both sides of the brexit..So lets get it to the vote
-
From Times Political Correspondent:
What is Labour planning to do when Parliament resumes?
They're looking at a three-pronged approach:
* Use a humble address to force the Govt to release Cox legal advice (h/t
@alexwickham
)
* Bullet-proof the Benn Act
* Force Govt to release more on Yellowhammer
So, no VoC then. Also supports the suspicion that I have held for a while that the Benn Act would not stand up in court, hence the Government's apparently contradictory statements on it.
-
He shouldn't resign simply because of the turmoil that would create in the short term above it is now...Let the people decide if they trust him to run the Country.These calls for him to resign are equally about opportunity for the Scots,Welsh and Labour.
We can have a g/e in a matter of weeks and put an end to this one way or another..I'm tired of the lot of them,remainers smugly sitting in the house of commons claiming they are ready to get back to work with selfies..Oh Really we've had nothing but squabbling,back stabbing,treachery from the lot of them for 3 years..They've achieved absolutely nothing so the week that they have had off has made no difference...
I appreciate most of you are remainers and every little opportunity to disrupt brexit you are seizing upon to cry foul..i'm tired of every party and both sides of the brexit..So lets get it to the vote
I'm not sure that we'll get a General Election within weeks. If the hardline Remainers are able to bank an extension, especially one for more than three months, I expect they'll push for a Second Referendum before a GE. It could mean we are stuck with a zombie Parliament for up to a year.
-
He shouldn't resign simply because of the turmoil that would create in the short term above it is now...Let the people decide if they trust him to run the Country.These calls for him to resign are equally about opportunity for the Scots,Welsh and Labour.
We can have a g/e in a matter of weeks and put an end to this one way or another..I'm tired of the lot of them,remainers smugly sitting in the house of commons claiming they are ready to get back to work with selfies..Oh Really we've had nothing but squabbling,back stabbing,treachery from the lot of them for 3 years..They've achieved absolutely nothing so the week that they have had off has made no difference...
I appreciate most of you are remainers and every little opportunity to disrupt brexit you are seizing upon to cry foul..i'm tired of every party and both sides of the brexit..So lets get it to the vote
No it’s not about Brexit. It’s about the PM acting unlawfully.
Of course Brexit is the background, but the issue for BJ is about parliamentary procedures where he can’t be trusted..
-
This interview typifies the mess we've got ourselves into
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdHXJT_AGx4
And is a real world example of why important decisions should not be handed down to 'the people'.
-
Boris wont resign nor should he..He should call a general election and maybe this time the opposition partys might go for it..Boris/tory's v Corbyn/labour with the lib dems thrown in...That's the first vote the people should decide....
Just do a thought experiment.
Imagine if Jeremy Corbyn was PM and he'd just been found guilty by a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court of deliberately lying to the Queen in order to prevent the elected Sovereign body of the country from holding him to task while he manoeuvred to make the biggest constitutional change for more than a century (arguably 3 centuries) having himself only been elected by a vote of a bunch of extreme left activists, who constituted 1 in 350 of the entire electorate.
Just stop and ponder for 5 minutes.
Then ask yourself if you'd just shrug your shoulders and say, "Aye. No problem. He can remain as PM."
This is MASSIVE. Until very, very recently, things that weren't a fraction as serious as this would immediately end political careers. You CANNOT just turn a blind eye. The fact that we are even discussing it is terrifying in its implications for the health of our democracy.
-
Boris wont resign nor should he..He should call a general election and maybe this time the opposition partys might go for it..Boris/tory's v Corbyn/labour with the lib dems thrown in...That's the first vote the people should decide....
Just do a thought experiment.
Imagine if Jeremy Corbyn was PM and he'd just been found guilty by a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court of deliberately lying to the Queen in order to prevent the elected Sovereign body of the country from holding him to task while he manoeuvred to make the biggest constitutional change for more than a century (arguably 3 centuries) having himself only been elected by a vote of a bunch of extreme left activists, who constituted 1 in 350 of the entire electorate.
Just stop and ponder for 5 minutes.
Then ask yourself if you'd just shrug your shoulders and say, "Aye. No problem. He can remain as PM."
This is MASSIVE. Until very, very recently, things that weren't a fraction as serious as this would immediately end political careers. You CANNOT just turn a blind eye. The fact that we are even discussing it is terrifying in its implications for the health of our democracy.
I strongly suspect that, to many people, that will all depend on how the right wing media paint it tomorrow morning.
-
Boris wont resign nor should he..He should call a general election and maybe this time the opposition partys might go for it..Boris/tory's v Corbyn/labour with the lib dems thrown in...That's the first vote the people should decide....
Just do a thought experiment.
Imagine if Jeremy Corbyn was PM and he'd just been found guilty by a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court of deliberately lying to the Queen in order to prevent the elected Sovereign body of the country from holding him to task while he manoeuvred to make the biggest constitutional change for more than a century (arguably 3 centuries) having himself only been elected by a vote of a bunch of extreme left activists, who constituted 1 in 350 of the entire electorate.
Just stop and ponder for 5 minutes.
Then ask yourself if you'd just shrug your shoulders and say, "Aye. No problem. He can remain as PM."
This is MASSIVE. Until very, very recently, things that weren't a fraction as serious as this would immediately end political careers. You CANNOT just turn a blind eye. The fact that we are even discussing it is terrifying in its implications for the health of our democracy.
BST, I am sure you will know the answer to my question.....
BJ has broken the law so what punishment will be bestowed upon him or does he walk away from this without anything being done about it?
Genuine question.
-
Hound.
He hasn't broken the criminal law so there is no legal punishment to be had.
What he has done, egged on by that maniac Cummings, is to realise how paper-thin our Constitution is, and to set about tearing it up.
Our Constitution depends on people being prepared to be reasonable. We now have someone who has contempt for that. The SC has ruled that he wasn't legally able to do what he did, but they have no power to further censure him by imposing a punishment.
It is up to US, the electorate, to pass judgement on that when the time comes.
Anyone, ANYONE who votes Tory at the next election is effectively saying that this action is OK and they approve of it.
This is WAY beyond Brexit. It is WAY beyond party politics.
Time to decide which side you are on.
-
I disagree a little there BST - yes, if the Tories don’t change and BJ is still the leader going into an election - but if they have a new leader and a clear manifesto then that’s not necessarily approving the current regime.?
-
I disagree a little there BST - yes, if the Tories don’t change and BJ is still the leader going into an election - but if they have a new leader and a clear manifesto then that’s not necessarily approving the current regime.?
IDM, you just beat me to it.
I was going to post something similar.
BST, thanks for your response.
-
Hound/IDM
Yes of course. I should have made that clear.
-
I would label myself as a-political and I distrust most of them regardless of what party they represent.
Next election however I will probably look closely at their manifestos and see who is the best option.
-
Boris wont resign nor should he..He should call a general election and maybe this time the opposition partys might go for it..Boris/tory's v Corbyn/labour with the lib dems thrown in...That's the first vote the people should decide....
Just do a thought experiment.
Imagine if Jeremy Corbyn was PM and he'd just been found guilty by a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court of deliberately lying to the Queen in order to prevent the elected Sovereign body of the country from holding him to task while he manoeuvred to make the biggest constitutional change for more than a century (arguably 3 centuries) having himself only been elected by a vote of a bunch of extreme left activists, who constituted 1 in 350 of the entire electorate.
Just stop and ponder for 5 minutes.
Then ask yourself if you'd just shrug your shoulders and say, "Aye. No problem. He can remain as PM."
This is MASSIVE. Until very, very recently, things that weren't a fraction as serious as this would immediately end political careers. You CANNOT just turn a blind eye. The fact that we are even discussing it is terrifying in its implications for the health of our democracy.
I strongly suspect that, to many people, that will all depend on how the right wing media paint it tomorrow morning.
Two column inches, column four, page 15.
-
30% of the population think the Supreme Court was wrong.
I wonder how many of them also think that we should be leaving the EU to regain sovereignty so that we can 'take back control'. Clearly the wrong type of sovereignty and the wrong type of control...
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1176503707741097985
-
I wonder if YouVov should have a vote on whether Newton's Laws of Motion apply at sub-relativistic velocities? Maybe folk know better than the experts on that an all.
We've gone haven't we. There's a massive chunk of the population who don't care about anything else but their side winning. Decency, honesty, integrity, respect for the law. None of it matters so long as you win.
I wonder what the correlation is between that 30% and the proportion of the population who think it's ok to dive to win a penalty if it helps you win the match?
-
Was the Supreme Court ruling effectively a VAR decision?
-
30% of the population think the Supreme Court was wrong.
I wonder how many of them also think that we should be leaving the EU to regain sovereignty so that we can 'take back control'. Clearly the wrong type of sovereignty and the wrong type of control...
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1176503707741097985
It's depressing how few people in this country have any idea how the Constitution they live under actually works, and apparently no interest in finding out. There's even been a few of them in this forum today.
-
The supreme irony in all this is that Corbyn is held up by Johnson (of all people) as 'the bogeyman'.
Now, I have no time for Corbyn - I think he's useless - but let's be clear, there is only one 'bogeyman' who is p**sing all over this country's rulebook and going all Venezuelan on us and that is Johnson.
It really is like the end of a whodunit when the penny drops that the real crook was the guy who was so awfully charming in the opening scene.
-
I'd be fascinated to know what Cummings is thinking tonight.
Behind that exterior look of a man who is taking on far more than he can handle and is stressed to breaking point, I suspect he's shitting himself that he's taken on more than he can handle and he's stressed to breaking point.
-
Yep, we want someone calm and collected like Jezza in power!
-
I'd be fascinated to know what Cummings is thinking tonight.
Behind that exterior look of a man who is taking on far more than he can handle and is stressed to breaking point, I suspect he's shitting himself that he's taken on more than he can handle and he's stressed to breaking point.
I can see Cummings now as he dusts off his hands thinking well that went well, what's next.
-
Remember brexit?
''The BBC’s Europe editor, Katya Adler, has posted a good thread on Twitter about the latest thinking within the EU as to what will happen with Brexit. She says EU sources think the chances of a deal at the October summit are now “pretty much nil”. Here are the first two tweets, but it is worth reading the whole thing (which you can do by clicking on the first post).
katya adler (@BBCkatyaadler)
As EU watches open-mouthed the scenes in Westminster.. in Paris, Berlin, Dublin, Brussels and the rest - leaders are asking: What Next?? And since no one knows for sure, there’s some contingency planning going on /1
September 26, 2019
katya adler (@BBCkatyaadler)
Chances of getting a deal with UK by the EU leaders’ mid Oct summit were never seen here to be high. Now contacts describe the likelihood as « pretty much nil ». Remember EU governments would need to see the text of a legally operable alternative to the backstop b4 the summit /2
September 26, 2019''
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1177145687114440704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
-
Our countries f*cked.
-
Our countries f*cked.
You've only just found out? It's been f*cked for 30 years.
-
We should plainly name this the Brexit non deal, there is never going to be one.
-
I actually think the chances of a deal have gone up in the past couple of weeks, even if that is from 0% to 10%.
There is going to be a GE in the next few months. Old 'die in a ditch' Johnson has staked his reputation and chance of 5 years of power on leaving the EU by 31st October. Farage is waiting with a shovel at the side of the ditch if he doesn't do it. The only possibilty he has of leaving on 31st October is with a deal.
Therefore the chances of a deal have gone up.
-
Is it time for the Poll in OP to be done again so we can see now how the discussions on here have impacted on people ?
Would it still be roughly the same or a radical change in one or either way
Come on Branton Rover - "hit" us again please
-
The original vote says 106 members voted, but if you add up the numbers they total 108. Dodgy dealings?!!
-
I actually think the chances of a deal have gone up in the past couple of weeks, even if that is from 0% to 10%.
There is going to be a GE in the next few months. Old 'die in a ditch' Johnson has staked his reputation and chance of 5 years of power on leaving the EU by 31st October. Farage is waiting with a shovel at the side of the ditch if he doesn't do it. The only possibilty he has of leaving on 31st October is with a deal.
Therefore the chances of a deal have gone up.
Yes, I think that's right.
Johnson will pivot back to the May deal if prevented from defaulting to a no deal exit.
This is why he is desperate for a new session of parliament...it can then be re-introduced.
He will need to tempt Labour rightists to support him, people like Kinnock and Flint, so the focus if on whether Labour will whip to policy or allow a free vote.
Any subsequent GE will then be badged up as the "keeping his word" project, despite the May deal being unsatisfactory to many.
-
Bloody hell - even Rachel Johnson just now on R4 actually saying BJ under pressure from individuals who have invested billions
in shorting the £ on assumption of no deal - she actually said that, out and proud
#failedstate
-
The original vote says 106 members voted, but if you add up the numbers they total 108. Dodgy dealings?!!
I think we can account for at least one of those, BB. First you voted Remain, then got titty on and voted Leave.
-
I didn't vote in it. It was before I'd finally made my mind up to support leave as a matter of principle.
-
I actually think the chances of a deal have gone up in the past couple of weeks, even if that is from 0% to 10%.
There is going to be a GE in the next few months. Old 'die in a ditch' Johnson has staked his reputation and chance of 5 years of power on leaving the EU by 31st October. Farage is waiting with a shovel at the side of the ditch if he doesn't do it. The only possibilty he has of leaving on 31st October is with a deal.
Therefore the chances of a deal have gone up.
Yes, I think that's right.
Johnson will pivot back to the May deal if prevented from defaulting to a no deal exit.
This is why he is desperate for a new session of parliament...it can then be re-introduced.
He will need to tempt Labour rightists to support him, people like Kinnock and Flint, so the focus if on whether Labour will whip to policy or allow a free vote.
Any subsequent GE will then be badged up as the "keeping his word" project, despite the May deal being unsatisfactory to many.
And this is the paradox he is facing. The more amiable he makes his deal to attract the support of Labour MP's - the less likely the ERG are to vote for it - and to remove him as they did May.
-
It is a bit of a paradox isn't it.
Johnson himself is having trouble with it.
First he voted against May's deal.
Then he voted against May's deal again.
Then he voted for May's deal.
Then he said May's deal was anti-democratic.
Now he says a law that he's claims makes it more likely to have to accept May's deal is a surrender.
I wonder if he is having problems with other everyday tasks. Like remembering how many children he has fathered.
-
He probably wouldn’t remember his own arse
if he wasn’t talking out of it if he wasn’t sat on it..
-
I reckon bb is Cummings, it all makes sense when you think about it.
-
Now now Syderney, just because I make sense doesn't mean to say I'm a top political advisor. Thanks for the compliment like!
-
happy prorogations, hip hip ................
-
It's got to be you bb Cummings is always on a wind-uo mission:
Cummings has also said serious threats of violence have been seen on both sides, adding that the “situation can only be resolved by parliament honouring its promise to respect the result” of the 2016 referendum.
People on all sides have said things that veered between unwise and very unpleasant, and sometimes criminal. That is true of people of the leave side and that’s true of people on the remain side.
People have been running around during the referendum campaign saying I was a Nazi, they run around for three years afterwards saying I am a criminal, and now a criminal Nazi.
And there are also a bunch of people on the Leave side who have said terrible things about remainers.
I also think there is a very important distinction between, on the one hand, a robust political discussion and debate, and threats of violence. Threats of violence are a completely different matter. They should be treated in a completely different matter; everyone should take those extremely seriously.
I know people on both sides of leave and remain who have had serious threats like that and it is obviously bad. In the end, the situation can only be resolved by parliament honouring its promise to respect the result.
-
Well, they have decided to make it easy to know when you are being lied to brazenly.
Just listen out for the phrase "surrender bill". This is code for outrageous lie.
The idea is to appeal to an imaginary version of WW2, and pretend that the EU is the modern equivalent of the Nazi's fought by the allies.
No morals in this campaign.
-
That's breathtaking from Cummings.
He built the entire Leave campaign on a principle of identifying people who were likely to get fired up by negative propaganda about the EU, then targeting them with lies on everything from the £350m to Turks appearing in your doorstep and the EU being responsible for polar bears being killed.
He deliberately and knowingly poisoned the whole tenor of the debate and he more than anyone else in the country is responsible for the vitriol we now have.
For him to now claim that both sides are equally to blame is risible.
-
What would people like to happen now? What would be fair to everyone not just what would be fair to what you believe in? Me personally have had enough of the whole thing brexit and politics, I like many others have resorted to name calling which is wrong so for me another referendum with remain or leave no deal on the ballot paper while I think remain would win I also believe most of the leave voters would just carry on there normal lives and after a couple of weeks not much more would be said, yes it would be different with politicians but for me it’s the only answer now
-
Bpool.
I'd have taken a sensible deal if it had been on the cards 2 years ago. We could have left the political structures of the EU and stayed in the SM and CU. That would have limited the economic loss and there'd have been no problem in Ireland.
There was a chance for politicians to agree to that but it's long gone now. And like you, I long for an end to the toxic atmosphere in the country.
Like you, I can't see any way out without a Referendum on exact, specific outcomes. If we did that and voted for No Deal, in the full understanding of what that meant, I'd be horrified but I'd accept it.
-
BST,
I have a sneeking feeling that if Corbyn gets to renegotiate a deal with the EU, it will be a Norway plus clone that emerges.
We may not have seen the end of it....the important question is whether Labour would support it as a party or not?
I reckon a free vote might be the least damaging solution.
-
The original vote says 106 members voted, but if you add up the numbers they total 108. Dodgy dealings?!!
I think we can account for at least one of those, BB. First you voted Remain, then got titty on and voted Leave.
I will "take" the other
Having lost in 75 by voting Leave I was on the losing side
This time2016 I voted Remain (seemingly bucking the OAP stance) and lost again
So I voted twice in this Vote just so I could say I had been on the winning side at least once ;)
-
What would people like to happen now? What would be fair to everyone not just what would be fair to what you believe in? Me personally have had enough of the whole thing brexit and politics, I like many others have resorted to name calling which is wrong so for me another referendum with remain or leave no deal on the ballot paper while I think remain would win I also believe most of the leave voters would just carry on there normal lives and after a couple of weeks not much more would be said, yes it would be different with politicians but for me it’s the only answer now
That's too polar extremes. As a Remainer we need Brexit with a decent deal, so that both sides can be somewhat pleased. We should never do the thing that leads to stockpiling of food and medicine and even running out of life saving drugs in some cases.
-
What would people like to happen now? What would be fair to everyone not just what would be fair to what you believe in? Me personally have had enough of the whole thing brexit and politics, I like many others have resorted to name calling which is wrong so for me another referendum with remain or leave no deal on the ballot paper while I think remain would win I also believe most of the leave voters would just carry on there normal lives and after a couple of weeks not much more would be said, yes it would be different with politicians but for me it’s the only answer now
I will answer that in a way as you say NOT what I want but to try to answer in a fair way in a bid to solve the issue and move on (mega difficult imo and getting worse by the day)
At the time of the Referendum in 2016 a small majority of those who could be bothered to Vote (only 75 per cent ish of those entitled to vote did so ) produced a vote to leave by simply putting an X against LEAVE
From that moment MPs and others have tried to justify / explain what those voting Leave actually wanted - and they cant possibly know any more than I can. They voted to Leave - simple as that
We have had mud slinging - and worse regarding the campaign for the Leave side - in particular its funding - and on the upside we as a nation have learnt more (so much much more) about the benefits and pitfalls of leaving the EU.
The Benefits are mostly tangible - we have them now - and they can be shown / proven whereasmost of the pitfalls cannot really be shown because we are still in the EU and only years will / would tell if we were right to Leave if indeed we do. We are approximating rather than being factual.
So I would say we need to have a Deal (or 2 or even 3) to put back to the people and alongside should be an option to Remain.
If the number of votes cast to Remain is greater than the combined total of the 1, 2 or 3 options to Leave then we should Remain (and let the people we elected as MPs "try to bring the Country together" - and I say good luck with that !
However if the combined number of Votes cast for the Leave options be that 1, 2 or 3 "deals" total more than Remain then that is that . We would have to accept that the Will of the British people is irrevocably to Leave and the Govt should then beaver away to produce a final once and for all departure from the EU by using the best Option or amalgamation of options
They should then work away to bring about as speedy an exit as possible and again work away to "bring the Country back together" - and again good luck with that
After that is all settled I hope the people turn on the Political situation and as a minimum introduce PR in order to try to decrease extremisim of any kind - we manage to bring about "world peace" and work away at getting Rovers in the Premiership (and of the 3 that looks the most likely to happen first)
-
What would people like to happen now? What would be fair to everyone not just what would be fair to what you believe in? Me personally have had enough of the whole thing brexit and politics, I like many others have resorted to name calling which is wrong so for me another referendum with remain or leave no deal on the ballot paper while I think remain would win I also believe most of the leave voters would just carry on there normal lives and after a couple of weeks not much more would be said, yes it would be different with politicians but for me it’s the only answer now
You are right in that people & politicians have to start negotiating together rather than trying to drive one another apart. It's become about identity rather than what is best for the country's economy or people's lives.
Sorry but there can't be No Deal. The three issues (the money we owe, citizens' rights and the Irish border) have to be resolved at some point. It's just a case of whether we want to be doing that with a loss of exports, food & medicine shortages and petrol rationing or acting sensibly.
-
A bit of analysis on whether or not Johnson is serious about getting a deal - and if so what that may look like here:
https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0927/1078626-brexit-supreme-court/
-
An interesting read, worrying too.
-
An interesting read, worrying too.
Indeed.
-
I picked this up on another site. It's well worth reading both letters in the link.
Meanwhile in yet another sign of the disaster unfurling before our eyes. The senior civil servant who works for Michael Gove has quit. Matthew Coats the Director general for EU Exit Implementation has quit his job just weeks ahead of 31st October. His particular expertise was Border Delivery and he was the third Director General for this area in as many months. High turnover in critical projects is never a positive sign for the delivery of such projects.
In parallel our clueless Brexit Secretary has written to Michael Barnier. You can read his letter and Michael Barnier's response https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/brexit-preparedness-correspondence-with-the-eu-institutions
The letter from Barclay is truly stunning in that he admits that the UK is not ready for no deal and is asking the EU for help in coming up with an exit plan that can be implemented in four weeks. No wonder Matthew Coats decided to bail out.
-
I picked this up on another site. It's well worth reading both letters in the link.
Meanwhile in yet another sign of the disaster unfurling before our eyes. The senior civil servant who works for Michael Gove has quit. Matthew Coats the Director general for EU Exit Implementation has quit his job just weeks ahead of 31st October. His particular expertise was Border Delivery and he was the third Director General for this area in as many months. High turnover in critical projects is never a positive sign for the delivery of such projects.
In parallel our clueless Brexit Secretary has written to Michael Barnier. You can read his letter and Michael Barnier's response https://www.gov.uk/government/public...u-institutions
The letter from Barclay is truly stunning in that he admits that the UK is not ready for no deal and is asking the EU for help in coming up with an exit plan that can be implemented in four weeks. No wonder Matthew Coats decided to bail out.
The link doesn't work.
-
What would people like to happen now? What would be fair to everyone not just what would be fair to what you believe in? Me personally have had enough of the whole thing brexit and politics, I like many others have resorted to name calling which is wrong so for me another referendum with remain or leave no deal on the ballot paper while I think remain would win I also believe most of the leave voters would just carry on there normal lives and after a couple of weeks not much more would be said, yes it would be different with politicians but for me it’s the only answer now
I will answer that in a way as you say NOT what I want but to try to answer in a fair way in a bid to solve the issue and move on (mega difficult imo and getting worse by the day)
At the time of the Referendum in 2016 a small majority of those who could be bothered to Vote (only 75 per cent ish of those entitled to vote did so ) produced a vote to leave by simply putting an X against LEAVE
From that moment MPs and others have tried to justify / explain what those voting Leave actually wanted - and they cant possibly know any more than I can. They voted to Leave - simple as that
We have had mud slinging - and worse regarding the campaign for the Leave side - in particular its funding - and on the upside we as a nation have learnt more (so much much more) about the benefits and pitfalls of leaving the EU.
The Benefits are mostly tangible - we have them now - and they can be shown / proven whereasmost of the pitfalls cannot really be shown because we are still in the EU and only years will / would tell if we were right to Leave if indeed we do. We are approximating rather than being factual.
So I would say we need to have a Deal (or 2 or even 3) to put back to the people and alongside should be an option to Remain.
If the number of votes cast to Remain is greater than the combined total of the 1, 2 or 3 options to Leave then we should Remain (and let the people we elected as MPs "try to bring the Country together" - and I say good luck with that !
However if the combined number of Votes cast for the Leave options be that 1, 2 or 3 "deals" total more than Remain then that is that . We would have to accept that the Will of the British people is irrevocably to Leave and the Govt should then beaver away to produce a final once and for all departure from the EU by using the best Option or amalgamation of options
They should then work away to bring about as speedy an exit as possible and again work away to "bring the Country back together" - and again good luck with that
After that is all settled I hope the people turn on the Political situation and as a minimum introduce PR in order to try to decrease extremisim of any kind - we manage to bring about "world peace" and work away at getting Rovers in the Premiership (and of the 3 that looks the most likely to happen first)
those that voted leave presumably wanted what was promised, they wanted 350m to put into the NHS every week wanted a great deal where the EU gave us everything but it cost us nothing where we took back control of everything? etc etc
-
I picked this up on another site. It's well worth reading both letters in the link.
Meanwhile in yet another sign of the disaster unfurling before our eyes. The senior civil servant who works for Michael Gove has quit. Matthew Coats the Director general for EU Exit Implementation has quit his job just weeks ahead of 31st October. His particular expertise was Border Delivery and he was the third Director General for this area in as many months. High turnover in critical projects is never a positive sign for the delivery of such projects.
In parallel our clueless Brexit Secretary has written to Michael Barnier. You can read his letter and Michael Barnier's response https://www.gov.uk/government/public...u-institutions
The letter from Barclay is truly stunning in that he admits that the UK is not ready for no deal and is asking the EU for help in coming up with an exit plan that can be implemented in four weeks. No wonder Matthew Coats decided to bail out.
The link doesn't work.
Strange, it does for me.
Here's another link https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/brexit-preparedness-correspondence-with-the-eu-institutions
HTH :)
Edited to say that I've modified the link in my original post in case others experience problems in opening it.
-
Thanks, it works now.
Barclay's letter is just anodyne pleasantries that says bugger all of substance. Well, fine words butter no parsnips.
-
Thanks, it works now.
Barclay's letter is just anodyne pleasantries that says bugger all of substance. Well, fine words butter no parsnips.
Indeed, anodyne pleasantries saying nothing, with a short paragraph stuck in at the end effectively saying 'please sir, can we go and talk to others in your club behind your back, it would help us no end if we could bypass official negotiations?'. Of course, Barnier saw straight through it - hence his short sharp reply.
-
The Tele, this should be fascinating viewing, snort, chuck.
''On the second day of the Conservative Party Conference, The Telegraph's Christopher Hope will interview Leader of the House of Commons, Jacob Rees-Mogg, and former Justice secretary David Gauke, during a live edition of Chopper’s Brexit Podcast.
Join our live stream above on this page to watch him explain how the party can deliver on their conference slogan: “Get Brexit Done”, amid growing political chaos, and reflect on what will happen if they don’t''
-
This is one of the main reasons for sticking with the EU?
Sweden’s navy HQ is returning to a vast underground cold-war fortress designed to withstand a nuclear attack, in what has been seen as a defensive move against a resurgent Russia.
After a 25-year absence, the navy will once again be commanded from beneath billions of tonnes of granite as the country strives to build up its defences in response to the perceived threat from Moscow.
The top secret naval base on Muskö, about 25 miles (40km) from Stockholm, resembles a cross between Tracy Island from Thunderbirds and the film set of You Only Live Twice, where James Bond grappled with arch villain Ernst Blofeld in his headquarters beneath a volcano.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/30/swedish-navy-returns-to-vast-underground-hq-amid-russia-fears
-
Proper serious now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49890034
-
Proper serious now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49890034
Of course any normal person knows the tesco deli butter pastry sausage rolls are the best (now only available at certain bloody stores)
-
So not getting industry help for a pork barrel election?
-
Politics late-2019.
Here's a prominent Tory Brexit supporter admiringly quoting Satan.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1179184311108538369
Context. That's a quote from Satan in Paradise Lost, where he's mulling over destroying the world so that it can be rebuilt as he wants it to be.
f**k me sideways...
-
Boris solution to ditching the backstop? He wants goods going from GB to NI or vice versa to have a Customs Declaration, because that's where the checks are going to happen!
-
Boris solution to ditching the backstop? He wants goods going from GB to NI or vice versa to have a Customs Declaration, because that's where the checks are going to happen!
So the rumours that johnson has asked trump and the Chinese to give him quotes to build an island off the Giants Causeway to be called North-Northern Island are not true? :)
-
the Tele says johnson is demanding that the EU opens talks on his cunning plan by the weekend or take the blame for No-Deal
-
The no deal that he is legally bound to avoid by Parliament, if a deal isn’t agreed.??
-
Soooo, what happens if the EU won’t accept his proposed deal, won’t give yet another extension and Parliament say he is legally bound to avoid no deal.
-
Soooo, what happens if the EU won’t accept his proposed deal, won’t give yet another extension and Parliament say he is legally bound to avoid no deal.
That's not what Parliament said.
-
Soooo, what happens if the EU won’t accept his proposed deal, won’t give yet another extension and Parliament say he is legally bound to avoid no deal.
That's not what Parliament said.
I didn’t suggest that they had.
IDM did.
-
Also what happens if the EU agrees to negotiations but they cannot agree before the 32st?
-
''Boris Johnson’s final “take it or leave it” Brexit offer to Brussels is in danger of being dead on arrival after it was rounded on by government and opposition parties in Ireland.
The prime minister’s proposals were described as unworkable, unacceptable and illegal under British domestic law, which bans any new infrastructure on the Irish border that did not exist before Brexit day.
“If this is the final offer, then there is not a deal to be had,” said one EU official.
Ireland’s European affairs minister, Helen McEntee, said the plans would not be acceptable to Dublin and raised doubts that Johnson was sincere in wanting a deal.
She said: “What we are talking about again is picking and choosing certain parts of the single market that would be aligned in Northern Ireland. It is talking about a time limit, which again is not acceptable.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/02/irish-officials-dismiss-boris-johnson-brexit-offer-as-unacceptable
-
Soooo, what happens if the EU won’t accept his proposed deal, won’t give yet another extension and Parliament say he is legally bound to avoid no deal.
That's not what Parliament said.
I didn’t suggest that they had.
IDM did.
Yes I did.. the law passed recently to avoid no deal..
-
So is Glyn wrong then when he says that is not what Parliament said?
-
If there isn't a deal put before Parliament, or if Parliament rejects a deal put before them, then Boris has to ask for an extension by 31st Oct. It didn't make No Deal impossible.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
Then I presume it's up to the opposition alliance to get legislation up before the 31st to stop the madman from wrecking the UK
-
I am now waiting for someone else to offer a different opinion.
-
If there isn't a deal put before Parliament, or if Parliament rejects a deal put before them, then Boris has to ask for an extension by 31st Oct. It didn't make No Deal impossible.
I thought it made no deal not possible, for 31 Oct.? Assuming the government abides by the law and requests the extension as the law demands.
If subsequently the EU denies an extension, then the UK has to act pretty quickly to set up another deal or parliament approves no deal. I can’t see the latter happening so you’re into the territory of a no confidence vote and even potentially revoking article 50.
To be honest I can’t see the EU rejecting an extension request..
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
-
We crash out and Johnson gets another five years.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
If the Temporary Government managed to get the reins before 31st Oct and then requested an extension for the specific reason of having a General Election and/or a second referendum - which are both specific events that can change the political nature of the UK, then I think the EU would allow an extension. The problem we have at the moment is that we'd be asking for an extension 'just because' and not for any quantifiable reason.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
If the Temporary Government managed to get the reins before 1st Oct and then requested an extension for the specific reason of having a General Election and/or a second referendum - which are both specific events that can change the political nature of the UK, then I think the EU would allow an extension. The problem we have at the moment is that we'd be asking for an extension 'just because' and not for any quantifiable reason.
1st October has been and gone I’m afraid
-
Well spotted. Give that man a coconut! ;)
-
It is most unlikely that the EU will not agree to an extension as they won't want to be seen to be the ones responsible for forcing us into a No Deal situation - they won't want to be 'blamed'.
They may, however, impose certain conditions, (to be defined by them), on that extension which we would either have to agree to or be seen to be the ones forcing No Deal through. And, whilst the latter would certainly cause great hardship to the majority of people in the UK it would make the Tories unelectable or some considerable time to come as they were the ones who forced No Deal through - which I suspect they wouldn't want to happen even if it made a few of their rich cronies even richer.
I think it's possible that an extension will be granted, followed by a vote of no confidence in the current government, followed by an interim government which would renegotiate part of the Withdrawal Agreement around remaining in either the Customs Union or the Single Market, (certainly the former, but possible even both). This would satisfy the EU, solve the NI border problem and would be a way of taking us out of the parts of the EU we don't appear to like.
Just my opinion, and I'm certain that whilst it would satisfy a number of leavers it certainly wouldn't satisfy them all.
-
I agree NNK and I think, given what has happened in the three years since the referendum it would take the wind out of the Farage sails for a generation at the very least. Other than the fascists on the right of our politics I can't see anybody wanting a replay of that.
-
An interim Govenment wouldn't negotiate anything, they wouldn't be around long enough for that. It'd be down to whoever was the Government after a General Election.
-
Whilst there are not the numbers in Parliament to leave with No Deal there also are not the numbers in the opposition parties to negotiate a deal. The LD's and Change UK will never vote for deal.
I also think it would be touch and go for a 'unity' government to get a referendum through. The Tories & DUP will never vote for one so it would only need a small number of Labour leave MP's to abstain for that to fail.
-
''This cowardly speech reveals Boris Johnson’s armoury is empty''
''Boris Johnson’s speech to the Conservative party conference was of a piece with his brief and tawdry prime ministership so far. The speech was a scam, an attempt to pretend that inconvenient realities can be wished out of existence by putting on a crowd-pleasing act. Yet these inconvenient realities include such things as the law of the land, the elected parliament, the European Union and the island of Ireland. Between them, these realities have enough clout to foil him''
Martin Kettle tells it how it is.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/02/boris-johnsons-speech-of-coward-conservative-conference
Come all ye brexiters, tell us this is the way to the promised land
-
Just spent 5 mins listening to Johnson going on about his NI border plans.
It's utter batshit. It's like the last 2 years never happened.
He's saying the UK including NI will leave the CU, but there'll be no need for any checks of stuff going across the border.
Name ANY border between two different regulatory authorities, anywhere in the world, where there are no checks.
Cut through the waffle and basically what he's saying is that we want a deal that the EU told us 2 years ago wasn't acceptable - the situation that led to the backstop.
We look like either idiots or charlatans to the rest of Europe.
-
He's saying the UK including NI will leave the CU, but there'll be no need for any checks of stuff going across the border.
Name ANY border between two different regulatory authorities, anywhere in the world, where there are no checks.
That's not, as I interpret it, what he is saying. He's admitting all the usual checks you would expect will need to happen, but they wouldn't happen at the physical border. Its a virtual border, spread over many different locations. Interestingly, small businesses are exempt from any border checks. How they work that I don't know. As an Irish MEP I heard an interview from said, the devil is really in the detail. If this is what they are going to suggest, they need a detailed plan of what is actually means in reality. Otherwise, its just a return to the 'technology solves everything' line.
Then.... there is the issue that Nothern Ireland will kind of follow some of the EU regulatory framework, kind of not. Necessitating the need for another half-baked border across the Irish Sea.
-
I know people in Ireland, there are very genuine fears that Johnson's plans would royally cock up the Good Friday Agreement and bring a return to The Troubles. So much for the Tories and the Ulster Unionists being all for the Union!
Incidentally, I think it's all bullshit, Johnson has no intention of brokering any deal because that would mean all of his cronies wouldn't get rewarded for shorting the pound. He's a charlatan and any supposed talks of all been a sham designed to put the blame on the EU and increase his standing among the nutty neo-fascists that this country has started breeding. I'm ashamed to be British right now!.
-
He's saying the UK including NI will leave the CU, but there'll be no need for any checks of stuff going across the border.
Name ANY border between two different regulatory authorities, anywhere in the world, where there are no checks.
That's not, as I interpret it, what he is saying. He's admitting all the usual checks you would expect will need to happen, but they wouldn't happen at the physical border. Its a virtual border, spread over many different locations. Interestingly, small businesses are exempt from any border checks. How they work that I don't know. As an Irish MEP I heard an interview from said, the devil is really in the detail. If this is what they are going to suggest, they need a detailed plan of what is actually means in reality. Otherwise, its just a return to the 'technology solves everything' line.
Then.... there is the issue that Nothern Ireland will kind of follow some of the EU regulatory framework, kind of not. Necessitating the need for another half-baked border across the Irish Sea.
In other words, it’s total b*llocks..
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
-
Ive given up (again) commenting on EU conjecture but just wanted to say .... great name !
-
He's saying the UK including NI will leave the CU, but there'll be no need for any checks of stuff going across the border.
Name ANY border between two different regulatory authorities, anywhere in the world, where there are no checks.
That's not, as I interpret it, what he is saying. He's admitting all the usual checks you would expect will need to happen, but they wouldn't happen at the physical border. Its a virtual border, spread over many different locations. Interestingly, small businesses are exempt from any border checks. How they work that I don't know. As an Irish MEP I heard an interview from said, the devil is really in the detail. If this is what they are going to suggest, they need a detailed plan of what is actually means in reality. Otherwise, its just a return to the 'technology solves everything' line.
Then.... there is the issue that Nothern Ireland will kind of follow some of the EU regulatory framework, kind of not. Necessitating the need for another half-baked border across the Irish Sea.
In other words, it’s total b*llocks..
There isn't enough detail to pass judgement. (Thus it can easily be accused of political strategising. I am sure there is a political term for that).
The backstop was basically a legal agreement that there would never be a "hard" border, first by staying in the customers union, and then hoping to god they agreed a (broad) free trade deal with the EU that would eradicate the need for a border anyway.
This proposal basically says there won't be a hard border because we've invented two soft borders with no firm details about what those soft borders will look like. NI with half stay in the customs union, the rest of the UK will leave.
This, of course, does not magic itself up after we agree to leave. It takes time, there will need to be interim period, concrete policies. Without that its nothing.
-
Coops.
But he's also saying that we have the unilateral right to pull out of any agreement after 4 years (or any 4 year period thereafter) if Stormont chooses to do so.
THAT is the bit I was meaning, whereby there would be a border but we would or could ignore it.
That can never be acceptable to the EU. It would mean free and unchecked movement of goods from our jurisdiction into the CU and SM. That's a ridiculous thing to expect the EU to accept. It would make the NI/Ire border a porous entrepôt to undermine the standards that the rest of the EU sign up to.
Look at this a serious proposal with any prospect of being implemented and it's utter nonsense.
Look at this position as having the strategic aim of making it easier to blame EU intransigence for the inevitable collapse of any deal and it's easy to understand.
-
I stand by my previous statement.!
-
BST. It doesn't give Northern Ireland an option to pull out of anything. There will always be at least one border (most likely always two). It gives NI the choice of where the 'hardness' of that border lies (a choice which they apparently will renew every 4 years). That is, whether they want to align more with EU or UK regulations.
Some nutters may argue this is more ''democratic" (for NI), but this critically ignores the real world potentially politically/socially damaging consequences of a perpetual debate in NI of whether they want to align wit the EU (i.e. Ireland) or UK.
-
bst: ''But he's also saying that we have the unilateral right to pull out of any agreement after 4 years (or any 4 year period thereafter) if Stormont chooses to do so''
The EU have already kicked this into touch as it doesn't give them an ongoing guarantee of a single market. End of
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
-
BST. It doesn't give Northern Ireland an option to pull out of anything. There will always be at least one border (most likely always two). It gives NI the choice of where the 'hardness' of that border lies (a choice which they apparently will renew every 4 years). That is, whether they want to align more with EU or UK regulations.
Some nutters may argue this is more ''democratic" (for NI), but this critically ignores the real world potentially politically/socially damaging consequences of a perpetual debate in NI of whether they want to align wit the EU (i.e. Ireland) or UK.
The critical part of this is the Stormont Assembly veto. The Assembly is set up in such a way that any large party has a veto over contentious decision - so in practice this gives the DUP a veto over trading rules and regulations on the island of Ireland every 4 years!
How is that going to go down in Ireland and Northern Ireland do you think?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly
Its not a real proposal. Or if it is then anyone associated with it should never work in government again.
-
Bobbymax, don't worry, a couple of days later it will be the Euro's turn to be shorted.
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done. This sh*tshow will just go on for years and years.
-
Out of interest on october 31 st (midnight 30th) will the European time be exactly the same as British Time ? assume it must be ?
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done. This sh*tshow will just go on for years and years.
But the simple answer isn't the correct one
-
In the interests of sanity and getting it done, the only answer is No-brexit, signed sealed and delivered, lets do it guys.
-
In the interests of sanity and getting it done, the only answer is No-brexit, signed sealed and delivered, lets do it guys.
If we all push together we can make a success out of it!
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done. This sh*tshow will just go on for years and years.
But the simple answer isn't the correct one
Isn’t it?
-
Out of interest on october 31 st (midnight 30th) will the European time be exactly the same as British Time ? assume it must be ?
Nope.
Why do you think we remember the Armistice at 11am?
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done. This sh*tshow will just go on for years and years.
But the simple answer isn't the correct one
Isn’t it?
"The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done" isn't correct
-
Yeah but I asked what happens if the EU won’t give another extension.
If Boris asks for the extension, he's complied with the Benn Act, Parliament cant force the EU to give one. If MPs want to stop No Deal in those circumstances they'll have to do something else. It'd probably force them to bang their heads together and work something out so they can introduce a VONC with the certainty of there being a replacement (albeit temporary) Government that commands a majority and gets the reins out of Boris's and Cummings' hands.
Thanks for that explanation.
However, what you say is all well and good but.........we have no guarantee that whatever the interim government came up with, that the EU would accept it.
We also don’t know whether we would be allowed a further extension.
Genuinely, what happens then?
We could revoke Article 50 and stay in (LibDem policy)
Dream on. The only thing that Leavers and Remainers have agreed upon on this forum recently is what a pathetic shambles the Lib Dems are.
I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD do it. It was just that some posters had asked what COULD be done
The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done. This sh*tshow will just go on for years and years.
But the simple answer isn't the correct one
Isn’t it?
"The simple answer to that is that nothing can be done" isn't correct
Ah, I see what you are getting at.
-
In the interests of sanity and getting it done, the only answer is No-brexit, signed sealed and delivered, lets do it guys.
And how on Earth can anyone achieve that?
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
-
Fed up with the long term economic mismanagement which, combined with Brexit, is tipping us into recession by the look of it an all.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKBN1WI0QC
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
-
SS
Everyone wants a General Election.
No-one is shitting themselves.
The key thing is first that we prevent the idiots in charge from crashing us out with a No Deal Brexit that no-one even countenanced in 2016.
Once that's secured, there'll be an election.
-
Perfect clarity from Leo Varadker today.
He laid out, simply and clearly that there have only ever been 5 possible ways that a hard border could be avoided in Ireland.
1) Ireland rejoins the UK
2) NI joins Ireland
3) The UK stays in the EU
4) The UK stays in the Customs Union
5) The Backstop is implemented until such time as the technological solution that the Brexiters have shouted for is found and implemented.
1 and 2 are obviously non-starters,at least for the present.
3 was booted out by May.
4 is clearly not acceptable to the Brexiters.
5 has been set up as a demon by Johnson to win him the keys to No10.
So that's where we are. For one reason or another, every route to avoiding a border in Ireland has been blocked.
That simple, undeniable objective truth.
There's no need to dress it up any other way. And since the EU has never once shown any sign of backing down in its position that if a border is reintroduced in Ireland, we are not getting a deal, we now have two choices.
a) No Deal.
b) A new Govt or Ref that would implement 3 or 4.
It's really that simple. There's no other discussion to be had.
-
The possibility of a border poll (option 2 above) under the GFA should not be disregarded.
I agree it will not impact the current discussion, but it may come into play as a consequence of the border controls once they are in place.
It is clear the Johnson plan will be rejected by the EU...as it was intended to be.
Reading the next move is the tricky bit.
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
-
Albie.
If you're really in favour of peace in Ireland, don't go wishing for a unification poll.
Just don't. Ever.
The genius of the GFA was that it gave both sides enough to think they had won enough. It gave them enough to make it reasonable enough to stop bombing, shooting and using meat saws and chisels to dismember those of the opposite persuasion. It is one of the crowning glories of late 20th century British politics, finding a solution to a 300 year old insoluble problem.
People who talk about unification are as flagrantly f**king about with that balance and the peace as those who talk about borders between NI and Ireland. Just don't do it.
-
BST,
You have not understood my post.
The GFA includes provision for a border poll, if triggered by changes to the arrangements set out under the GFA. The Johnson deal may trigger such an action.
I did not give an opinion on what SHOULD happen, although you mistakenly think I did.
Whether you or I think it is for the best, or for the worst, is nothing to the point.
My point was that a consideration of option 2 could be generated by the current proposal, if border controls are re-established.
The GFA will need to be re-examined in relation to any outcome which is different to the current status quo.
There are serious questions about the viability of the NI economy under UK control after the departure of the UK from the EU, none of which are addressed in the Johnson deal.
The business community in NI have been flagging this up, with no response to the tariff issues.
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Steve to keep quoting 17.4 m and saying they were dudded is wrong by the plain fact that it wasn't binding which were the rules under which it was taken. You appear to be misrepresenting the conditions of the vote. You cannot change the rules after the vote, if the vote had been declared binding beforehand who knows how many more or less would have voted that didn't or did, how many from either side would have voted differently? It would be like having a GE and then changing the rules afterwards.
To now declare the vote binding because it favours your view of what should happen is misrepresenting the whole of the UK's voting population.
Taking back control is showing farge, johnson and corbyn that we will not be pushed around.
-
It WAS binding. The Prime Minister said so.
-
I own the Moon.
There. I've just said it so it must be true.
-
Albie.
Point taken. My apologies if I misread you.
I stand by my general point though. There is nothing more likely to kick off another generation of violence in NI than serious talk of a unification ballot. Both sides need to feel that they have got enough out of the situation to keep a lid on things. Personally, I can see nothing but a GFA type approach working for 2-3 generations. Maybe more.
May e one day the concept of identity determined by nationality will fade away and with it, the core of the problem.
-
This same argument again, we didnt get the result we wanted hence lets ignore it. All sides promised a binding once in a lifetime decision and then all promised they'd implement it.
Still waiting.....
-
I own the Moon.
There. I've just said it so it must be true.
The pub that used to be in Carcroft? No wonder they knocked it down.
-
BFYP.
And there's the rub.
What WAS the decision in 2016? What was the clear and unambiguous direction that The Will Of The People said?
The fact that the concept of "Leave" is so vague is precisely the reason why we're still flapping about 40 months on.
In 2016, most people would have considered an outcome where we ended up being like Norway would constitute "Leave". Do you agree?
40 months on, that's not even in the agenda because the far right of British politics has hijacked Brexit and has proclaimed that a Norway deal would be a betrayal of The Will Of The People.
And THAT is why we have to look at the decision again. To get clarity that everyone can buy into, not to have a far right interpretation imposed on us with no democratic validity.
-
How much more will it take for leavers to realise they've been conned?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-environment-rules-trump-trade-deal-a9143221.html
Taking back control? MY ARSE!
-
As we have all been predicting Kato, prices will go up for everything except the UK labor force that will be sold down the river thames.
-
This same argument again, we didnt get the result we wanted hence lets ignore it. All sides promised a binding once in a lifetime decision and then all promised they'd implement it.
Still waiting.....
They certainly did not all promise they would implement it - anything but! Farage said if Remain won he wanted a 2nd referendum.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
-
If Remain had won there would have been nothing to implement, It would have been status quo! No one would have stopped us continuing being in the EU! Totally different to now where we have been prevented from leaving for 3 years!
Farage merely insisted he would continue to fight to leave. Absolutely and completely different!
-
Take your complaints to your own party they're the ones that stopped brexit
-
If that was entirely the case you'd absolutely love the Tories.
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
-
This same argument again, we didnt get the result we wanted hence lets ignore it. All sides promised a binding once in a lifetime decision and then all promised they'd implement it.
Still waiting.....
They certainly did not all promise they would implement it - anything but! Farage said if Remain won he wanted a 2nd referendum.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681
Gem of a comment by Farage there.
"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way."
That should be projected on his forehead everything he's interviewed.
-
So if Farage was wrong to insist on a second referendum had he lost, why are Remoaners not wrong now?
-
I think it shows what a 4 faced tw@t fargo is
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
When you and others harp on about 17.4 million, don’t forget there are about 16 million plus who voted remain, and around a further 10 million in the electorate who didn’t vote.
Parliament represents all of them, doesn’t it.?
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
When you and others harp on about 17.4 million, don’t forget there are about 16 million plus who voted remain, and around a further 10 million in the electorate who didn’t vote.
Parliament represents all of them, doesn’t it.?
They're there to represent the population of 70 million, not just the 32 million who voted at the last election and certainly not just 17.4 million who keep banging on about democracy not being respected by other people.
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
When you and others harp on about 17.4 million, don’t forget there are about 16 million plus who voted remain, and around a further 10 million in the electorate who didn’t vote.
Parliament represents all of them, doesn’t it.?
So if the result doesn't count, what was the point of the referendum in the first place?
-
You asking us or Farage SS?
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
When you and others harp on about 17.4 million, don’t forget there are about 16 million plus who voted remain, and around a further 10 million in the electorate who didn’t vote.
Parliament represents all of them, doesn’t it.?
So if the result doesn't count, what was the point of the referendum in the first place?
It was to get the UKIP monkey off the Conservatives back, nothing else. And it backfired and we've all paid the price since.
-
Dead simple Steve it's time the adults told our representatives that we're fed up with chaos, fed up with the UK sinking into the fiscal swamp, fed up with the tories rule after going on 10 wasted years of mayhem and tell them we want to kick farage and brexit into touch. We are the employers they work for us we pay them, maybe it's time for everyone to get out on the streets.
Dead right Sydney, they do work for us, 17.4 million of us. As regards kicking Farage and Brexit into touch, you'll get your chance to do that in the voting booths; just as soon as your people stop sh*tting their pants and agree to a GE.
Bugger off, they represent everybody in their constituency, including those that didn't vote for them so stop trying to re-invent their job description. I've yet to hear of a constituency with an electorate of 17.4 million. Mind you, it does beg the question - how many MPs do you think the 16 million get to work for them?
First of all, don't tell me to bugger off. The reason I mentioned 17.4 million people was that they're the ones who most of the MP's are not working for, since promising to honour the referendum result.
As far as I'm concerned, they're just a bunch of cheating, conning, conniving shysters. None of them will get my vote. Not ever again.
When you and others harp on about 17.4 million, don’t forget there are about 16 million plus who voted remain, and around a further 10 million in the electorate who didn’t vote.
Parliament represents all of them, doesn’t it.?
So if the result doesn't count, what was the point of the referendum in the first place?
Where did I say the result doesn’t count.?
I was fairly sure my point was that Parliament represents all the electorate - nothing more, nothing less..
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Apologies for the caps.. .
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
If you don't vote, you don't have any right to complain about the outcome, in my opinion.
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
That was exactly the point I was trying to make that's a lot of people - time we were made to vote like the Aussie system.
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
I wonder how many more would have voted it it were a mandatory referendum rather than an advisory one?
-
Thing is, with this referendum, the only vote choosing for something other than maintaining the status quo was “leave”.
It’s too late now obviously, but the referendum should have been based on all the electorate and if you didn’t vote you were not actively voting for change, ie non voters = remain.
Leave would only win by exceeding 50% of the electorate..
-
If those numbers are accurate, only 37.4% of the electorate voted to leave..
-
Yes compulsory voting would probably be a way forward although in this case (we will never know) might still have produced a majority for Leave but that of course is pure speculation by me
I would of course (here we go again alert) prefer PR of some sort but dont know if that would be more or less affected by no show voters ?
In other words if there are millions of missing voters in a GE would it affect the result in FPTP or PR more or less or cant we tell - or do we not give a Donald anyway. Be honest I can take it :woohoo:
-
:clapping:
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
If you don't vote, you don't have any right to complain about the outcome, in my opinion.
Need to find out why that many people DIDN'T vote - that's a lot of folk who SHOULD have had an opinion if they truly believed it could result in the mess it has !
Yes ONLY 37.4% of the electorate.
62.6% either wanted to Remain or didn't think this would affect their lives to this extent
-
Interesting what that champion of democracy, Arron Banks said on this topic.
"If turnout is low, we win. If it’s high, we lose," Mr Banks said. "Our strategy is to bore the electorate into submission, and it’s working."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/anti-eu-leave-campaign-chief-arron-banks-nhs-privatised-a7022306.html%3famp
Oh, the bankroller of Leave.EU and Farage's Mayfair flat (these elites, eh?) also said in that article that he wanted the NHS privatised.
Still, he sticks it to the libs, dunt he, so he must be on the side of the working man.
-
And that oversimplification is exactly why binary referendums shouldn't be used on such complex issues.
it was a vote and as such should stand or democracy is dead
David Davis disagrees. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-countries-democracy-brexit-vote-article-50-second-referendum-a7629636.html
I don't give a flying chit what he says we voted out and the courts said there will be no second vote so what the flock has it got to do with him
Why did you you vote out?
-
If those numbers are accurate, only 37.4% of the electorate voted to leave..
The numbers are accurate and you are correct.
'Democracy' in action eh!
-
REFERENDUM RESULT TO CUT OUT THE VAGUE FIGURES BANDED ABOUT :
13,000,000 DID NOT VOTE OR HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO VOTE !!
---------------------------------------------------------
Total 46,500,001
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout
Yep, 13 million didn’t bother to vote.
I wonder how many of those are primary moaners now (whichever side they are whinging about).
If you don't vote, you don't have any right to complain about the outcome, in my opinion.
I totally agree AL, that is what I was getting at.
-
If those numbers are accurate, only 37.4% of the electorate voted to leave..
The numbers are accurate and you are correct.
'Democracy' in action eh!
And even lower % wanted to stay in. The EU since that point has done absolutely nothing to change the problems that some had with it.
-
That's a big ask bfyp for 27 countries to change their modus operandi for a small %age of ppl from a single country when the benefits received for the many are great.
-
BFYP
There are nearly half a billion people in the EU. 17 million of them, many self-admitting to having little knowledge on the topic, voted for us to leave. You expect the EU to make major changes to satisfy the 3%?
-
I thought it worthwhile bring this tweet to people's attention. We shall soon see if he is correct:
Q: What does it tell you when in one 24 hour period No.10 floats:
-daring the Queen to sack the PM
-daring the police to arrest him
-threatening to sabotage the EU if A50 is extended
-a Commons vote on a Deal the EU has flatly rejected?
A: That it has no plan & is desperate.
https://twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1180770547438931968
-
BFYP
There are nearly half a billion people in the EU. 17 million of them, many self-admitting to having little knowledge on the topic, voted for us to leave. You expect the EU to make major changes to satisfy the 3%?
Bear in mind even the remain vote was waged on changing the relationship with the eu, that is conveniently forgotten.
I wonder how many eu citizens and where like the eu as is or would want change. We will of course not ever know that.
-
I thought it worthwhile bring this tweet to people's attention. We shall soon see if he is correct:
Q: What does it tell you when in one 24 hour period No.10 floats:
-daring the Queen to sack the PM
-daring the police to arrest him
-threatening to sabotage the EU if A50 is extended
-a Commons vote on a Deal the EU has flatly rejected?
A: That it has no plan & is desperate.
https://twitter.com/StewartWood/status/1180770547438931968
That's Cummings' MO.
Fire out dummies left right and centre to try to wrong foot everyone.
Whether or not it works, it is very damaging to any residual trust in politics. But then that's part of Cummings' MO too. Feed on the fact that many people are so anaesthetised to distrustful politicians that they'll just shrug when you take it up to a whole new level.
-
If those numbers are accurate, only 37.4% of the electorate voted to leave..
The numbers are accurate and you are correct.
'Democracy' in action eh!
And even lower % wanted to stay in. The EU since that point has done absolutely nothing to change the problems that some had with it.
And a very significant % didn’t vote at all - my point being by not voting, you are not actively choosing the change..
If the government had arbitrarily decided to leave the EU with a referendum on the leave options, then that would be a different matter..
-
BFYP
There are nearly half a billion people in the EU. 17 million of them, many self-admitting to having little knowledge on the topic, voted for us to leave. You expect the EU to make major changes to satisfy the 3%?
Bear in mind even the remain vote was waged on changing the relationship with the eu, that is conveniently forgotten.
I wonder how many eu citizens and where like the eu as is or would want change. We will of course not ever know that.
It’s easier to change how the club is run from within.
-
Read this Twitter thread. All of it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1180543762205986821
This Financial Times journalist is NOT some soft as shite lefty. Far from it.
And look what he is saying. The UK economy has tanked since the 2016 vote.
Then remember. This tanking doesn't mean we all lose our jobs and pensions overnight. It means a long, slow decline.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AnitaCTHF/status/1180750977772769280
That's what you've given your grandkids. You older folk who voted Leave because...well why?
You've put the country your grandkids will inherit onto a long term slower growth trajectory.
That means they'll be poorer than they should have been. They'll work harder to pay the mortgage and the gas bill than they should have done.
They'll have a shitter NHS than they should have done, and worse pensions than you have.
But f**k it eh? You took back control.
-
If folk thought they were "taking back control", then who did they think was going to have it?
Well, it looks like Borump is getting ready to sell off control to US corporations:
https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/agriculture/news/107053/brexit-uk-moves-scrap-%e2%80%98level-playing-field%e2%80%99-eu
Protections removed, then sell the asset...just like Bury FC really.
True to form, eh!
-
or put another way:
Leaked government briefing paper concludes that UK will not be able to resist pressure to massively weaken environment & health standards in pursuit of trade deals post Brexit & this will..”irreparably damage the environment & public health”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trump-food-hygiene-standards-trade-department-memo-a9145971.html
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/10/07/brexit-liz-truss-theresa-villiers-defra/
Put that on the side of your bus...
-
There's so much to tell your grandkids as they grow up, how you voted for the referendum and the party to give back control as you cook the 3 legged chicken for dinner with a corn syrup gravy.
-
Read this Twitter thread. All of it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1180543762205986821
This Financial Times journalist is NOT some soft as shite lefty. Far from it.
And look what he is saying. The UK economy has tanked since the 2016 vote.
Then remember. This tanking doesn't mean we all lose our jobs and pensions overnight. It means a long, slow decline.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AnitaCTHF/status/1180750977772769280
That's what you've given your grandkids. You older folk who voted Leave because...well why?
You've put the country your grandkids will inherit onto a long term slower growth trajectory.
That means they'll be poorer than they should have been. They'll work harder to pay the mortgage and the gas bill than they should have done.
They'll have a shitter NHS than they should have done, and worse pensions than you have.
But f**k it eh? You took back control.
Funny how Professor Patrick Minford has slunk from view...
Even he - the doyen of the Brexit economist brigade - realises that there is no longer a basis for peddling the nonsense about the supposed economic case for Brexit.
-
The Cummings Plan revealed
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/how-number-10-view-the-state-of-the-negotiations/
Our legal advice is clear that we can do all sorts of things to scupper delay which for obvious reasons we aren’t going into details about. Different lawyers see the “frustration principle” very differently especially on a case like this where there is no precedent for primary legislation directing how the PM conducts international discussions.
We will make clear privately and publicly that countries which oppose delay will go the front of the queue for future cooperation — cooperation on things both within and outside EU competences. Those who support delay will go to the bottom of the queue.
we won’t engage in further talks, we obviously won’t given any undertakings about cooperative behaviour, everything to do with ‘duty of sincere cooperation’ will be in the toilet, we will focus on winning the election on a manifesto of immediately revoking the entire EU legal order without further talks, and then we will leave.
Be afraid people, be very afraid!
-
Read this Twitter thread. All of it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1180543762205986821
This Financial Times journalist is NOT some soft as shite lefty. Far from it.
And look what he is saying. The UK economy has tanked since the 2016 vote.
Then remember. This tanking doesn't mean we all lose our jobs and pensions overnight. It means a long, slow decline.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AnitaCTHF/status/1180750977772769280
That's what you've given your grandkids. You older folk who voted Leave because...well why?
You've put the country your grandkids will inherit onto a long term slower growth trajectory.
That means they'll be poorer than they should have been. They'll work harder to pay the mortgage and the gas bill than they should have done.
They'll have a shitter NHS than they should have done, and worse pensions than you have.
But f**k it eh? You took back control.
Funny how Professor Patrick Minford has slunk from view...
Even he - the doyen of the Brexit economist brigade - realises that there is no longer a basis for peddling the nonsense about the supposed economic case for Brexit.
Did you see that comment in Chris Giles's tweet about how Mumford has deleted the predictions he made about the economy booming after the Brexit vote?
But he did his job. There's folk on here still quote him as a serious economist who says we'll be great after Brexit.
-
The governments jus published No Deal Readiness Report makes interesting reading....
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/837312/DExEUReportWEB.PDF?fbclid=IwAR0nnCQ6KBQsK6uLVyOZIugKdA8dlUe_ZxYvgisCr_zcyXwaSfpBmTdt0ms
Basically, it says we're not actually ready, (though we've done a bit of work in the background), and we're passing the buck to business, financial institutions and consumers. But don't worry BJ's Foreword and Gove's Preface mean everything's going to be just hunky dory - and I doubt leavers will read any more of it than that!
-
Flint and the Labour rebels have written to the EU to urge agreeing a deal...unfortunately it is unclear what deal they think the EU should agree;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGXXkNBWsAMZd0_.jpg
and
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGXXkNCXYAUqNaf.jpg
-
Just electioneering Albie. So they can say "Well, WE wanted to vote for a deal" on the doorsteps in November.
-
Posted without comment from Tom Peck but I advise you to read the article:
I can’t recall many days in the last few years like this one. There is absolutely nothing funny to say. A clique of liars, frauds, degenerates and psychopaths, shielded from the misery they spread, have broken their country for nothing. They will be reviled for all time.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-cummings-gove-merkel-no-deal-a9147696.html
-
I've just heard possibly THE most disgraceful interview by a politician in my lifetime.
Head of the Tory backbench MPs' 1922 Committee on R4.
When asked about Cummings' manic ramble this morning he answered, "His do we know that happened? You in the media could be making it up."
Just deliberately and wilfully spreading the message that there is no objective truth anymore. Dismiss anything difficult as Fake News. Encourage people to disconnect from facts and trust their gut.
This is so, so dangerous. There'll be a reckoning eventually, but the damage this is doing to public discussion is horrific.
-
And when the reckoning comes, this Kitson, this disgusting, horrible, evil bas**rd Banks will be the perfect example of how this country lost its soul.
Just look at the filth his and Farage's Leave.EU are pumping out today.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Arron_banks/status/1181599586672156672
It's 20-f**king-19. Who sees this, 75 years after the fighting stopped and feels anything but revulsion?
And when you've got a repulsive rabble rouser like Morgan telling you you've gone too far...
Anyone, ANYONE who supports the Brexit Party is putting themselves in line with this shit. Take a look at yourselves and ask where your souls are.
-
BST, I dont see how anyone could on that point.
I have seen your other response btw, I'll reply shortly but manflu, first week back at work prior to leaving next week plus a 3 week old baby is not a good recipe.
-
You have my sympathy BFYP. Mrs S-T and I both got horrendous flu when our youngest was born. Not fun. Good luck with the bairn and the illness. And ignore me!
-
Looks like the brakes have been cut and we're hurtling down the road about to crash.
What's everyone's predictions? Recession or a utopia?
-
People you don't see much these days...
You don't...I mean he's not very...he used to be all the time but now...
Ok. What the f**k has happened to David Davis?
https://mobile.twitter.com/Mr_PAULOT/status/1181331088314109952
He used to be so.... important. And full of opinions. About Europe. Begging us for a deal.
I'm worried for him. He's awfully quiet these days
-
...... as is Weasel Fox and Grayling (went to Rotherham last night Failing Grayling on a failing Pacer Train)
Where are they now ?
-
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/britain-toilet-roll-stockpiles-brexit-164504568.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL2RZNVZrYTY3eXk_YW1wPTE&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEqwTxsmf9JNl6otPZVaHHV3G1u9UCJFx_u8_dfWjfJ7SVCauxRK62Xooi0rB-sVO-E7DLyF7Q9zhwyyhm1hqMiRq-Kz1j7AbpSTyxYc0UfIJB7dgT4pHX4Qt8y_bjjmogToGwvEe_Ntvm5TKHywSihXbVciSOAeOIK27zX2b4TZ (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/britain-toilet-roll-stockpiles-brexit-164504568.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL2RZNVZrYTY3eXk_YW1wPTE&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEqwTxsmf9JNl6otPZVaHHV3G1u9UCJFx_u8_dfWjfJ7SVCauxRK62Xooi0rB-sVO-E7DLyF7Q9zhwyyhm1hqMiRq-Kz1j7AbpSTyxYc0UfIJB7dgT4pHX4Qt8y_bjjmogToGwvEe_Ntvm5TKHywSihXbVciSOAeOIK27zX2b4TZ)
We'll run out of loo roll with no deal. :laugh:
Can we do a nationwide poll and anyone who wants no deal Brexit has to deal with the shit. Us that never asked to be poorer get the good stuff.
-
And when the reckoning comes, this Kitson, this disgusting, horrible, evil bas**rd Banks will be the perfect example of how this country lost its soul.
Just look at the filth his and Farage's Leave.EU are pumping out today.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Arron_banks/status/1181599586672156672
It's 20-f**king-19. Who sees this, 75 years after the fighting stopped and feels anything but revulsion?
And when you've got a repulsive rabble rouser like Morgan telling you you've gone too far...
Anyone, ANYONE who supports the Brexit Party is putting themselves in line with this shit. Take a look at yourselves and ask where your souls are.
I thought that poster was fake. Banks’ response definitely isn’t is it.
-
No Gaz. It's a genuine poster from Leave.EU.
They've deleted it now. Because it drew too much negative comment, not because they don't believe what they were saying.
Not a word of condemnation or apology from Farage. Or from the Faragists in here for that matter.
-
Here's an experiment for all you Brexiters....
1. Think of a destination
2. get in a taxi
3. scream "LEAVE" at the taxi driver
4. when asked "where to" by the driver scream "JUST GET IT DONE"
5. Let me know where you end up.
-
Here's an experiment for all you Brexiters....
1. Think of a destination
2. get in a taxi
3. scream "LEAVE" at the taxi driver
4. when asked "where to" by the driver scream "JUST GET IT DONE"
5. Let me know where you end up.
I’m a taxi driver, I’d just throw the nutter out 😀
-
Once again I despair of all the rubbish that is spouted by each of the Leave and Remain protagonists
I desperately hope we get a second (really third) Referendum and vote to stay in the EU. I know a lot of people who voted Leave would be miffed and I would feel sorry for them ....BUT ....
... as Kevin Keegan said I would love it just love it seeing all these supposed "Leaders" and luminaries going apopletic when they realise the thing they have schemed and cheated and lied for had GONE for at least 2 generations
-
...... as is Weasel Fox and Grayling (went to Rotherham last night Failing Grayling on a failing Pacer Train)
Where are they now ?
And Rees-Mogg's gone a bit quiet too hasn't he. Since he got a proper job in Government rather than being free to snipe and plot from the sidelines.
Or it could be that he's had his arse kicked for that humungous f-up over the prorogation that never was.
-
Once again I despair of all the rubbish that is spouted by each of the Leave and Remain protagonists
I desperately hope we get a second (really third) Referendum and vote to stay in the EU. I know a lot of people who voted Leave would be miffed and I would feel sorry for them ....BUT ....
... as Kevin Keegan said I would love it just love it seeing all these supposed "Leaders" and luminaries going apopletic when they realise the thing they have schemed and cheated and lied for had GONE for at least 2 generations
we only had a once in a generation vote 3 years ago thou!
-
Read this article and tell us how we are better off out of the EU and while you're at it think of the complete nutters like farage, johnson and trump that will say and do anything to tip the balance to their own favour. Trump has already restarted one war and it doesn't take too much imagination to believe that he could change legislation to allow him to make a nuclear decision alone.
'First world war's Pompeii': burial for British soldiers found in Flemish field
Ceremony marks end of archaeological dig that unearthed web of tunnels and remains of 110 men
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/10/first-world-wars-pompeii-burial-for-british-soldiers-found-in-flemish-field
-
Voting for brexit is voting for an open season for carpetbaggers as they hang around like piranha in the sewers.
''Dominic Cummings accused of conflict of interest over NHS fund
Boris Johnson’s aide was consultant for AI startup that could win share of £250m fund''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/11/dominic-cummings-accused-of-conflict-of-interest-over-nhs-fund
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
I would suggest the movement in the markets are signalling something is in the offing, they seem quite buoyant. Big week coming up but that there is complete silence from number 10 suggests they want something done, then the question to all MP's is if they want it finishing or whether they say no again!
-
If he gets a deal sorted I'll take my hat off to him. But I just don;t see it. You still have the two immovable objects.
1) The EU will not allow a deal that doesnt have a long term guarantee of a frictionless Irish border. That requires either a backstp type agreement, or the whole UK staying in the CU.
2) That is simply not acceptable to 10 DUP MPs and a couple or three dozen ERG Tory MPs. So, unless the ERG really WERE bullshitting in their opposition to May's deal (which 1, above would effectively be, as Wilts has pointed out) just to have a far-right coup of the Tory party, then that deal could not get through Parliament. There is no way any Labour MP with an ounce of self respect will vote for Johnson's deal (if he pulls one off) because he's deleted all clauses on us retaining the same workers' and environmental standards as the EU. And of course, if Johnson does get a May-type deal through, he's massively vulnerable to Farage's attack dogs after giving us what Farage would call a betrayal of Brexit.
My take is that this is all positioning before the final collapse of the negotiations. Cummings let the cat out of the bag early this week, in saying that the negotiations had ended. But both Johnson and the EU want to be seen to be positive right up to the final moment, so they can both say "Well, WE wanted a deal" when it falls apart and we're in 100% crisis mode this time next week.
I might be wrong, but that's the only explanation that makes any sense at the moment.
-
Handy for me that the markets have responded well. I'm off to the USA with work next week and the Pound has jumped 5% against the dollar in the last 36 hours. Time to get my dollars this weekend I think.
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
I would suggest the movement in the markets are signalling something is in the offing, they seem quite buoyant. Big week coming up but that there is complete silence from number 10 suggests they want something done, then the question to all MP's is if they want it finishing or whether they say no again!
It's surely too complex than just to say let's finish it?
Both sides should want the best possible outcome for the future whether it's in or out of the EU.
I have no confidence in anybody that I have seen so far getting us a good trade deal.
-
''What does the Johnson-Varadkar Brexit statement mean?
Andrew Sparrow dissects the leaders’ joint statement to find no one is ready to give up yet''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/10/what-does-the-johnson-varadkar-brexit-statement-mean
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
Were they ever starters?
-
The events occurring on the South Eastern Turkish Border will be having a profound effect on the Bureacrats in Brussels They have tried to threaten Erdogan and suddenly the situation has actually dawned on them!
Erdogan doesn't give a chuff about what the EU has to say, all they can do is threaten him, he turned around and bluntly told them to get ready to receive Three and a half million refugees.
He has got a massive military capability which dwarfs the Eu Armed force.
Because without the UK element they are nothing! French, German, Dutch, Spanish , Italians Armed Forces are under strength under staffed , under equipped and under trained.
They must be shuddering in their Boots in Brussels, suddenly all of the attempts to bully The British Goverment and British People have bitten them on the bottom,We have every right to turn our backs away!. Let them sort The Turks out! By causing all of the recent grief they have lost a very powerful friend and Ally. The much vaunted 'EU' armed Force is nothing without the UK element. And no we won't have to take a massive Quota of Refugees forced on us by Brussels ! British Lads and Lasses will not be sacrificed at the whim of some bourgeois Twit from some country the size of one of our smaller Counties.
It's going to cost them Several hundred Million Euros to sort their years of underspending and under investing in defence.
It will be interesting to see how 'cheeky' they are in the upcoming weeks.
I bet Boris Johnson is wetting his pants laughing at them!
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
You do know that the economy is still going to take a hit with a deal, just not as big as if there would be with No Deal, don't you?
-
Glyn so they say, what I do know is whatever the markets do. it is an opportunity for people with money to make money, what you are saying is guess work, other people with the assets to do something about it will really make the decisions.
My long term tip will be a run on the Euro,
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
You do know that the economy is still going to take a hit with a deal, just not as big as if there would be with No Deal, don't you?
Glyn, we will see on that. The remainers had us believe wed have been in a huge recession by now with wide scale unemployment. It is yet to appear.
Nobody in any circumstances should wish for it, we should want the best whatever outcome....
-
BFYP.
You do financial numbers for a living so I'm sure you know that we've had a massive economic slowdown compared to other G7 countries since the 2016 vote. We've lost something like £100bn in economic output as a result.
It doesn't help the standard of the debate when people who should know this are blissfully unaware of the damage that this disaster has already wreaked.
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
You do know that the economy is still going to take a hit with a deal, just not as big as if there would be with No Deal, don't you?
Glyn, we will see on that. The remainers had us believe wed have been in a huge recession by now with wide scale unemployment. It is yet to appear.
Nobody in any circumstances should wish for it, we should want the best whatever outcome....
Anyone who bothers to look properly will already know it's reality, and we haven't even left yet.
-
Glyn so they say, what I do know is whatever the markets do. it is an opportunity for people with money to make money, what you are saying is guess work, other people with the assets to do something about it will really make the decisions.
My long term tip will be a run on the Euro,
So my twenty-years-worth of specialised knowledge of Customs procedures - and from that what I know British businesses are going to have to pay more to import and export and that it is going to be much harder to make sales to 60+ countries the second we leave the EU and Customs borders go up - count for nothing...and you have the brass neck to maintain I'm just guessing. Piss off.
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
I would suggest the movement in the markets are signalling something is in the offing, they seem quite buoyant. Big week coming up but that there is complete silence from number 10 suggests they want something done, then the question to all MP's is if they want it finishing or whether they say no again!
It's surely too complex than just to say let's finish it?
Both sides should want the best possible outcome for the future whether it's in or out of the EU.
I have no confidence in anybody that I have seen so far getting us a good trade deal.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, if Johnson did sort a deal it would "not be the end, nor the beginning of the end. But it might, perhaps, be the end of the beginning".
Irrespective of the deal that gets struck, this country would be in for a serious period of economic adjustment - 5-10 years at least in my view - as it tries to recover the lost opportunity cost of being a full member of the EU.
-
Plus being mismanaged for all these years and we don;t even have trade agreements of any note set up with ready markets, if the UK was a business the receivers would have been called in already.
-
Plus being mismanaged for all these years and we don;t even have trade agreements of any note set up with ready markets, if the UK was a business the receivers would have been called in already.
Nah, if Britain was a business the asset strippers would wait for the value of country to tumble and then move in and make a killing.
-
Voting for brexit is voting for an open season for carpetbaggers as they hang around like piranha in the sewers.
''Dominic Cummings accused of conflict of interest over NHS fund
Boris Johnson’s aide was consultant for AI startup that could win share of £250m fund''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/11/dominic-cummings-accused-of-conflict-of-interest-over-nhs-fund
They already are Glyn
-
I hope that most of you do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.
You reckon.... Boris Johnson's Surrender Deal...
We're only making plans for Nigel
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1182683593073713154
-
Sad times for Sunderland, already cut night work shift at the Nissan plant which has led to pay cuts to 3,000 members of staff and now Chairman of Nissan Europe is saying if there is no deal then job losses and even plant closure is a possibility.
https://twitter.com/itvtynetees/status/1182625970869682179?s=19
-
I bet you won't read about this in the Sun, Mail Express etc......
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/1307/contents/made
Explained here......
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/10/11/hmrc-plan-to-suspend-the-rule-of-law-in-the-event-of-brexit/
And Brexiters still think it's a good Idea!
-
I bet you won't read about this in the Sun, Mail Express etc......
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/1307/contents/made
Explained here......
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/10/11/hmrc-plan-to-suspend-the-rule-of-law-in-the-event-of-brexit/
And Brexiters still think it's a good Idea!
From the Blogg of Richard Murphy he isn't exactly sat on the fence at the Moment ,trying to brown nose his way into a Labour Govt should there ever be one again in my lifetime! (I'm 60)
-
Sproty?
And? Someone can have different political views to you and still be correct in the way they identify, interpret and report facts.
Your post sums up the shithole that we are in. "He's from the other side of the political fence to me, therefore I'll ignore him because he must be lying."
-
Sproty?
And? Someone can have different political views to you and still be correct in the way they identify, interpret and report facts.
Your post sums up the shithole that we are in. "He's from the other side of the political fence to me, therefore I'll ignore him because he must be lying."
Billy I didn't say I was ignoring him I merely pointed out quite correctly that his current Political stance puts him in the remain camp.
Also where in my post have I called the man a liar?
-
You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.
What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?
-
You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.
What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?
It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.
-
What's wrong about it?
-
You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.
What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?
It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.
I posted a link to the full government article. So, having read it fully - what's your interpretation?
-
The provisions on tax suspension are extremely disturbing, but the issue is below the radar.
Nobody knows about it, this level of detail is not covered in the media.
A further assessment of the relative costs of the options on the table is also beyond the media horizon;
https://www.ft.com/content/7cdfa832-e908-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55
This is in the FT, based on the IFS and Citi analysis....these are not Labour sources!
If the FT article does not open, it is summarised on Chris Giles twitter here:
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1181443140143779840
The real story is running in the background, not in the full view of the electors.
-
Having looked at the Statutory Instrument, I've no problem with it being there. It's the only way to allow HMRC the flexibility to organise themselves quickly enough to respond to whatever situation we end up in, probably at a moment's notice the way things are going. The Statutory Instrument has to include the language that people are getting their knickers in a twist about just to cover every possible contingency because...we're only three weeks away from the putative date of Brexit and still nobody has any idea at all what the final arrangement is going to be, including HMRC.
Which is why the continual adverts from the Gorvernment lecturing everybody else to be ready for Brexit are nothing but a sick (and expensive) joke.
-
You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.
What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?
It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.
I posted a link to the full government article. So, having read it fully - what's your interpretation?
I have no intention whatsoever of wasting my weekend interpreting statute law to this forum .unless you pay me £1,000 per hour for my valuable time.
One little bit 4 c and 4 d merely permits the HMRC to ease regulations for the public good,it's not a smugglers and Carpetbaggers charter!
-
Sproty.
So yeah. As the man was saying. The Govt are giving HMRC the power to suspend collecting certain taxes in the event that Brexit is a clusterf**k.
Once again. What was he saying that you disagreed with? And if you're not disagreeing with him, why did you bring up his political leanings?
-
Sproty.
So yeah. As the man was saying. The Govt are giving HMRC the power to suspend collecting certain taxes in the event that Brexit is a clusterf**k.
Once again. What was he saying that you disagreed with? And if you're not disagreeing with him, why did you bring up his political leanings?
Because as you say it is merely a means to enable the HMRC to operate with some flexibility should the need arise.there was no need for him ti rabbit on the way he did!
-
Sproty.
The point is WHY they need that "flexibility" (and by the way, when have you ever known HMRC be given sweeping powers to suspend tax before in your lifetime?)
You reckon planning like that is not something that the public should be aware of and discuss?
-
Sproty.
The point is WHY they need that "flexibility" (and by the way, when have you ever known HMRC be given sweeping powers to suspend tax before in your lifetime?)
You reckon planning like that is not something that the public should be aware of and discuss?
We used to have the power to give 'Indulgences' and waive Excise Duty, but that was on a case-by-case basis depending on the situation. I just see this as Indulgences writ large. Government Departments have had similar powers for years through Statutory Instruments.
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
-
Fair dos.
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this. Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this. Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!
Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.
Statutory Instruments are not Parliament 'abdicating responsibilty'. They are Parliament itself granting the authority to the Executive to act on their own initiative without having to pester Parliament by referring every tiny detail back to them. Parliament can scrutinise the use of Statutory Instruments in retrospect any time they want, should they think it necessary, because the ultimate authority is still that of Parliament.
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this. Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!
Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.
The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something! We always used to send small boys up chimneys........
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this. Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!
Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.
The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something! We always used to send small boys up chimneys........
It has to be done like that because there just isn't the time to put every tiny detail of every bloody policy through both Houses of Parliament, there simply isn't enough hours in the day to physically do it!
-
Glyn
Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?
Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.
Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this. Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!
Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.
The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something! We always used to send small boys up chimneys........
It has to be done like that because there just isn't the time to put every tiny detail of every bloody policy through both Houses of Parliament, there simply isn't enough hours in the day to physically do it!
Which is EXACTLY why Article 50 should NOT have been enacted until full detailed planning had been completed and all issues known and covered! Not withstanding that, it's been three years now, time enough to understand the issues and plan for them, but we haven't! For some strange reason Glyn you seem by your arguments to be defending the way Brexit has been run! This whole thing is a total and utter cock up of unimaginable proportions and our government and the civil service appear to be in reaction mode as things that should have been known become known! This is NOT the way to run a country!
-
I'm not defending the way brexit has been run, I'm defending the way Parliament is run. Even if every detail had been known well in advance, most of the authority to enact those details would have been delegated to the civil service to enact via Statutory Instruments, it would NOT have been put in front of Parliament in every minute detail, only the basic framework goes before Parliament. If you don't believe me, go and look at just about any piece of legislation in the past century. Including the Article 50 triggering Act itself - it's virtually nothing but Statutory Instruments!
-
I think Corbyn has to change on brexit to get the support he needs for the top job but he must be seen as a major threat to the tories when you look at how much time the murdoch press spends trying to undermine him.
-
I really don't want this to end, it is so easy, thank you labour and your other gob sh*te friends over the weekend talking any deal down.
A nice little 3.5% skim off the top in a hour and a half on a pull back short. Please don't do anything silly, no less than a five year minimum extension is required.
-
I really don't want this to end, it is so easy, thank you labour and your other gob sh*te friends over the weekend talking any deal down.
A nice little 3.5% skim off the top in a hour and a half on a pull back short. Please don't do anything silly, no less than a five year minimum extension is required.
There's always someone happy to 'make' off someone else's misery! :turd:
Now, if you contributed what you 'made' to the foodbank.............
-
You want to see my Tax bill buddy, When you have contributed as much as I have over the years I might , just might, give you a little time to state your case. Not promising you would like the response though.
-
Been overcharged, have you? Or just paid the going rate, like the rest of us?
-
You want to see my Tax bill buddy, When you have contributed as much as I have over the years I might , just might, give you a little time to state your case. Not promising you would like the response though.
Thanks for helping out with the missiles for the nuclear submarines that are never going to be used and the new aircraft carrier that had to turn back because it leaked. If you wouldn't mind a voluntary contribution to help out the 14 million in poverty and the 800 000 homeless that would be appreciated.
Hope you enjoy your winnings as much as Priti Patel did, smirking on the Marr show when he was reading out the list of companies who would be affected and laying people off a result of Brexit. I don't believe that all Brexiteers are cruel, mean spirited and heartless, although it is clear some are.
-
WOOO, hit a nerve in the left foot have I.
-
I think suggesting you have paid more tax than your fair share or more than others without a shred of evidence is a bit off Selby
-
WOOO, hit a nerve in the left foot have I.
I presume that's the foot in your mouth.
-
WOOO, hit a nerve in the left foot have I.
I note you have not refuted anything in my post. I says it like I sees it...
-
Nope, no need to, not that bothered. Didn't see the smirk as I was out doing unpaid work for a charity close to your heart.
-
Congrats, want a medal?
-
No, not at all buddy, if I didn't want to do it I wouldn't.
-
No, not at all buddy, if I didn't want to do it I wouldn't.
What, make money off the back of someone else's misery?
-
I've got to stop reading this thread.
Some of the posts like Selby's above make so f***ing angry I could scream.
-
I've got to stop reading this thread.
Some of the posts like Selby's above make so f***ing angry I could scream.
Only if you believe them.
-
But he is right, there is money to be made out of Brexit or any scenario.
Still no sign of a deal but it seems to be getting closer. Interesting week ahead.
-
But he is right, there is money to be made out of Brexit or any scenario.
Still no sign of a deal but it seems to be getting closer. Interesting week ahead.
Put money on Johnson saying at the 11th hour the EU are being unreasonable, no deal can happen and it's not his fault that he has to ask for an extension aka vote for him in the general election, pretty please
-
But he is right, there is money to be made out of Brexit or any scenario.
Still no sign of a deal but it seems to be getting closer. Interesting week ahead.
Put money on Johnson saying at the 11th hour the EU are being unreasonable, no deal can happen and it's not his fault that he has to ask for an extension aka vote for him in the general election, pretty please
That is a possibility but I actually don't think he'll do that. The stronger play for him is to actually get a deal as he can then say "look actually I'm not this massive no dealer they all say" and it brings him back from the extremes.
But again it's whether he wants to appeal to more moderate tories or whether he actually wants to be Nigel Farage.
-
But he is right, there is money to be made out of Brexit or any scenario.
Still no sign of a deal but it seems to be getting closer. Interesting week ahead.
Put money on Johnson saying at the 11th hour the EU are being unreasonable, no deal can happen and it's not his fault that he has to ask for an extension aka vote for him in the general election, pretty please
100%.
Plus, if he'd been able to walk away with No Deal, the EU would have bent.
And folk will believe that.
-
Put your money on a deal, gut feeling from conversations this week
-
Getting a deal is the only way IMHO that Johnson can survive politically.
There is too much opposition to no deal so if that happens he’ll be out.
If he caves in and asks to extent Brexit, then he’ll potentially lose the GR which will happen, or be ousted by the Tories..
-
Mr Barnier has said the last chance of a deal is today, so this could be it, Bank shares are pointing towards maybe a deal, they could be the best barometer, if anybody or companies have any detail it will be them.
-
If there are signs of a deal in the offing - from both sides - would it not make sense to agree an extension to make that deal happen, rather than risk falling through simply due to an arbitrary deadline at the end of October.?
-
Probably yes IDM, I am just going on Barnier's statement saying today is the last chance to agree a deal, they are reported to be locked in talks at the moment and no detail coming out.
The pound is up against nearly all currencies, the Euro is up against the Dollar, and the DAX and CAC are up also the FTSE down slightly but coming off lows, bank shares more centred on British and European business up while those more centred on Asian and US down slightly.
With the time limit set of tonight, could be 51% to 49% chance of a deal.
I have pulled out it is anyone's guess.
-
Put your money on a deal, gut feeling from conversations this week
... and if there is put money on a move - from the minute we leave - to get us back in !
-
The ERG will probably back it.......... but I can't see the DUP agreeing.
I can't see it getting through parliament as it won't get cross party support.
Remoaners and soft Brexiters in parliament are emboldened, with the Mr Benn Act effectively blocking a no deal exit on the 31st, so they have bought time to get something closer to their preferred option.
If it was this deal or the cliff edge I think it might/could pass, as it's not there's no need to give BoJo the glory...
-
If a deal is agreed MM, the parties that oppose it will be buried at the next election, and are risking being of no consequence for years to come, and being responsible for the rise of the Brexit Party, especially in the north and west of England.
-
If a deal is agreed MM, the parties that oppose it will be buried at the next election, and are risking being of no consequence for years to come, and being responsible for the rise of the Brexit Party, especially in the north and west of England.
I agree... I guess there is always a way to convince the DUP to back them again...... £££££££££££££ ; however, any deal still has to be agreed by the the EU and Parliament. Not sure it's going to happen - then what a GE or 2nd Ref...?
-
If the proposals mentioned are the case, the DUP should snap their hand off, it's an unreal deal for NI that could make it very prosperous indeed. It's also perhaps the most logical.
It's all about if there actually is a deal though and I hope there is as a no deal is just not the right answer.
-
If the proposals mentioned are the case, the DUP should snap their hand off, it's an unreal deal for NI that could make it very prosperous indeed. It's also perhaps the most logical.
It's all about if there actually is a deal though and I hope there is as a no deal is just not the right answer.
I'm not sure BJ's deal is the right answer either. It seems his deal would make us worse off than May's
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1182595006382645249
At least he'd be able to sell it as a 'harder' Brexit than May's............ :turd:
-
The bank sector like the notion, as do the French and German industrialists by the looks of it, and as you know Kato they are the ones that really count. If it is a deal to be put before Parliament, a lot of remain MP's are about to be put in an awkward position.
After all the big call has been for certainty by the industrialists, and the risk to the remainers will be the deal, or them voting it down and the risk of a hard Brexit becoming a reality, as I think the EU want it over with, and pressure to accept will come from their side as well as our electorate.
Of course this is if the signs are right, and an agreed deal is in the offing, if not here we go again.
-
According to reports it wont be the remain MP's who are worried it will be the ERG & DUP. Any deal will be nothing but May's (original) one they have previously rejected, put back to them on different coloured paper.
Paging Mr Farage, Boris Johnson's Surrender Act incoming...
-
According to reports it wont be the remain MP's who are worried it will be the ERG & DUP. Any deal will be nothing but May's (original) one they have previously rejected, put back to them on different coloured paper.
Paging Mr Farage, Boris Johnson's Surrender Act incoming...
Presumably why Boris was desperate for a new session of Parliament, so he could put it in front of them yet again using the creaky old political trick of giving something a new name and pretending it's brand new.
-
Ive just seen that git (better keep it clean) Baker .... saying I will vote for the proposed deal if as I seem to be hearing it. It will be tolerable TOLERABLE ?
I cant believe what I heard. If its a tolerable deal I will vote for it. It might be tolerab;e to him but what about the millions of people for whom it is not and will not be anywhere near tolerable
I include Leavers of course who voted for various things like the proposed tightening up of immigration which wont be what they wanted - and Remainers who of course did not want to leave
The 2 bit low down self centred selfish git. NEVER have I ever wanted to say what I really think more than now.
-
The bank sector like the notion, as do the French and German industrialists by the looks of it, and as you know Kato they are the ones that really count. If it is a deal to be put before Parliament, a lot of remain MP's are about to be put in an awkward position.
After all the big call has been for certainty by the industrialists, and the risk to the remainers will be the deal, or them voting it down and the risk of a hard Brexit becoming a reality, as I think the EU want it over with, and pressure to accept will come from their side as well as our electorate.
Of course this is if the signs are right, and an agreed deal is in the offing, if not here we go again.
SMMT don't like the thought of a Hard Brexit at all, preparing for it has already cost the UK motor industry a fortune....
https://www.smmt.co.uk/2019/10/uk-auto-gives-reality-check-on-no-deal-brexit-as-new-survey-shows-one-in-three-firms-already-shedding-jobs/
oh, and jobs are ALREADY being lost!
Where, oh where, are all the Unicorns and sunlit uplands you were promised?
-
It doesn't matter what sort of deal blowjob gets or doesn't get there will be no deal possible as good as the one we have now.
And still no one can tell us what improvements there will be with brexit, it's like trading in your two year old bentley and the salesman says OK give me motor and gives you the bus fare home.
-
The motor industry as we know it is dying and it will not be in just this country. The dash to EV's is being pushed two quickly, the governments have vilified diesel and petrol cars and the infrastructure and way of taxing electric cars ( no doubt by the mile when introduced) is some way down the road.
Add to which automation will take over, and poorer countries will vye for the new factories to build the vehicles which could work out more economical to build than alter the old factories, I would not count on a long career in the industry in the UK whatever happens to Brexit.
It is nothing new the coal, much of the steel, docks, fishing, textile, coal fired electricity generation etc. have disappeared without much sympathy by the wider public, and all industries that employed probably more people.
As a town Doncaster has lost International Harvesters (Case), ICI, most of Crompton Parkinsons and British Ropes, the whole of the mining industry,Burtons the tailors, Cementation, Most of the rail industry, Pilkingtons glass works, plus all the smaller companies that serviced those companies such as Mining Supplies and Mudds etc. all while being a member of the Common Market or the EU.
Some of those companies moving within the common market EU with grants to set up in other member countries such as Poland.
Employment in the Doncaster area, as far as skilled well paid jobs are concerned has not a lot to thank the EU for.
-
I hope BST has not jumped ship - need him to keep you in order lol (missing him already)
-
I don't mess with him Wolfie, he is too clever for me. And I don't have time to read everything he posts as an answer.
-
I really must give credit to Brexiteers who for three years now have managed to hoodwink the British public by suggesting that the political decision of successive Tory and Labour governments to abandon manufacturing and instead make the economy dependent on financial services based exclusively in the south-east was down to the EU.
Germany, France, Italy they have all kept a manufacturing base, they are all in the EU. In fact those three governments state rail companies own more British rail infrastructure and make more profit from British public than our government does. Entirely down to Tory government policies.
If there is one con trick that sums the whole project up that is it. I can recommend Robert Peston's book 'WTF' for details.
-
''The motor industry as we know it is dying and it will not be in just this country. The dash to EV's is being pushed two quickly, the governments have vilified diesel and petrol cars and the infrastructure and way of taxing electric cars ( no doubt by the mile when introduced) is some way down the road''
Industry will always move factories to where it can manufacture at less cost, it's how it works when profits are required.
Diesel engines are a source of fine particle matter that is extremely dangerous to health there is no safe level of pm2.5.
Volkswagen and possibly other manufacturers have shit in their own nests by corruption and endangered the lives of millions of people.
Electric vehicles are the future and what could be fairer than paying for usage by a tax per mile? use the car less pay less ..................
Brexit will amplify all the bad things about our economy and make it more costly to operate just about everything.
Doncaster would have lost all of those industries you mention brexit or no brexit but what the EU does and has done is help regional areas of Britain including Doncaster with it's development funding, something our own london centric governments finds difficult if not impossible to do.
A better government would have used the billions made from the oil industry to set up new industries to replace those old manufacturing plants instead of spaffing it all over their supporters in the form of tax cuts, I take it Selby you didn't get any of those cuts from your previous post?
-
looks like a five week extension that negates the Ben act is in the offing. The opposition parties are said to be furious and is pushing us closer to a general election the PM wants. That is according to the news flash on the radio, if a deal is not agreed today.
-
The only newsworthy things I can see about any “new” real is the NI thing. What else has changed from May’s deal.?
If there is a shorter extension I would assume parliament would pass Benn Act 2, to prevent no deal again..
-
The deal isnt clear so we dont know. Clearly the DUP need to be on board given the opposition will never vote for a deal.
A short extension seems sensible but it does feel like being so close to agreement the Benn act doesnt help. Of course the eu can just say we will see on that if they do want the deal done.
-
It's perfectly clear that any deal has to involve NI staying in the CU. There's no question about that.
If a deal emerges, that fact will be fudged over by some waffle.
The ERG screamed that May's deal which required NI to stay in the CU was a betrayal and Johnson was regularly calling it anti-democratic as recently as a month ago.
If that lot now trumpet this as a deal they can accept, there is no reason why they should have voted against May's deal. That would just seal the point I've been making for 2 years. This was never about Brexit. Its about the Far Right taking over the Tory Party.
You'll have been duped lads. Difficult to admit, I know, but that's what's happened.
-
As I said, give it a different name and pretend it's something new. Oldest political trick in the book.
-
It's perfectly clear that any deal has to involve NI staying in the CU. There's no question about that.
If a deal emerges, that fact will be fudged over by some waffle.
The ERG screamed that May's deal which required NI to stay in the CU was a betrayal and Johnson was regularly calling it anti-democratic as recently as a month ago.
If that lot now trumpet this as a deal they can accept, there is no reason why they should have voted against May's deal. That would just seal the point I've been making for 2 years. This was never about Brexit. Its about the Far Right taking over the Tory Party.
You'll have been duped lads. Difficult to admit, I know, but that's what's happened.
I'll probably get slaughtered for this, but I'm not really fussed how it ends up for NI. However, I do tend to think it right for the people that live there that the politicians on all side have a say as peace there is actually important for us all even if the economics are less so. The DUP of course should be careful as if it all goes wrong and BJ gets either a majority post election or there is no deal ever there say is gone, it may well never get better for them.
It does though seem like they are going for a fairly similar deal with some changes, now the devil will be in the detail. I hope it's a sensible deal and one that gets done so we can all move on.
Boris will be happy this afternoon if the latest Yougov opinion poll verifies, miles and miles ahead.
-
Golden Uplands eh?
Two quotes from Andrea Leadsom....
Jan 2017 - "Now, as we prepare to leave the EU, I will be looking at scrapping the rules that hold us back and focusing instead on what works best for the UK"
Oct 2019 - "If you often travel to the EU for business you will need to check if you need a visa or a work permit" "If you sell goods in the UK you may need to start using a new UK product marking after Brexit", "If you are new to trading, or aren't VAT registered you need to apply for an EORI number to continue doing business after Brexit", "If your business receives personal information from the EU, your business will have to change how it does this after Brexit", "If your business sells manufactured goods on the EU market you will need to follow new processes after Brexit".
And leavers still won't admit they were conned! What on earth will it take?
-
Sorry bfyp, how can any form of brexit deal be called sensible? this bunch of self centred maniacs has put the country through 3 years of hell we've lost over 100bn with more huge losses to come, the only honest name that could be put on brexit is 'insane'
-
Both sides have to take equal blame Sydney the remain mps have tried block it at every attempt,I’m not saying we had much bargaining power but they made sure we had none
-
I still hang my head in despair at what is the biggest single political mess I have lived through WHICHEVER way you personally have voted.
I still hate people saying as Ian Duncan Smith did this morning " people write to me and talk to me and stop me on the street and just say - "lets just get this done" we have had a vote and we want it finished NOW"
I suspect he knows (or suspects that if a second Referendum turns up) the likely outcome to "finish it" would end in a Remain vote. The latest Poll of Polls shows Remain if offered would come out somewhere like 54 - 46 and thats why that abysmal bloke ......Baker MP just wants a "tolerable" deal that he and others can vote for rather than lose the prize they have worked , schemed and subverted the last Referendums result for
What a selfish git he and others like him are. Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
-
Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
Thought you would be alright with the other wolves.... :whistle:
-
Yeah - they are ok - and they were just glad to get back into Europe !
-
It's perfectly clear that any deal has to involve NI staying in the CU. There's no question about that.
If a deal emerges, that fact will be fudged over by some waffle.
The ERG screamed that May's deal which required NI to stay in the CU was a betrayal and Johnson was regularly calling it anti-democratic as recently as a month ago.
If that lot now trumpet this as a deal they can accept, there is no reason why they should have voted against May's deal. That would just seal the point I've been making for 2 years. This was never about Brexit. Its about the Far Right taking over the Tory Party.
You'll have been duped lads. Difficult to admit, I know, but that's what's happened.
I see you've decided to stay with us. Well done mate, this place wouldn't be the same without you.
-
Thanks SS.
-
I still hang my head in despair at what is the biggest single political mess I have lived through WHICHEVER way you personally have voted.
I still hate people saying as Ian Duncan Smith did this morning " people write to me and talk to me and stop me on the street and just say - "lets just get this done" we have had a vote and we want it finished NOW"
I suspect he knows (or suspects that if a second Referendum turns up) the likely outcome to "finish it" would end in a Remain vote. The latest Poll of Polls shows Remain if offered would come out somewhere like 54 - 46 and thats why that abysmal bloke ......Baker MP just wants a "tolerable" deal that he and others can vote for rather than lose the prize they have worked , schemed and subverted the last Referendums result for
What a selfish git he and others like him are. Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
I'm not so sure the polls at all show that. The biggest was a Comres poll published this morning of 26000 people (big for a poll) which did not at all show that (42% for remain, 50% leave (out of 2 options), 8% don't knows. But it is just one poll.
-
It's perfectly clear that any deal has to involve NI staying in the CU. There's no question about that.
If a deal emerges, that fact will be fudged over by some waffle.
The ERG screamed that May's deal which required NI to stay in the CU was a betrayal and Johnson was regularly calling it anti-democratic as recently as a month ago.
If that lot now trumpet this as a deal they can accept, there is no reason why they should have voted against May's deal. That would just seal the point I've been making for 2 years. This was never about Brexit. Its about the Far Right taking over the Tory Party.
You'll have been duped lads. Difficult to admit, I know, but that's what's happened.
I see you've decided to stay with us. Well done mate, this place wouldn't be the same without you.
His handful of supporters would certainly struggle with a missing digit, even more so with him being the thumb!
It would have been difficult for them to carry on minus a finger, never mind the pollex.
-
You seem to be consumed by the green eyed god bb, time to grow up
-
Time you got yer'sen a sense of humour, Pinky.
-
I still hang my head in despair at what is the biggest single political mess I have lived through WHICHEVER way you personally have voted.
I still hate people saying as Ian Duncan Smith did this morning " people write to me and talk to me and stop me on the street and just say - "lets just get this done" we have had a vote and we want it finished NOW"
I suspect he knows (or suspects that if a second Referendum turns up) the likely outcome to "finish it" would end in a Remain vote. The latest Poll of Polls shows Remain if offered would come out somewhere like 54 - 46 and thats why that abysmal bloke ......Baker MP just wants a "tolerable" deal that he and others can vote for rather than lose the prize they have worked , schemed and subverted the last Referendums result for
What a selfish git he and others like him are. Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
I'm not so sure the polls at all show that. The biggest was a Comres poll published this morning of 26000 people (big for a poll) which did not at all show that (42% for remain, 50% leave (out of 2 options), 8% don't knows. But it is just one poll.
I have seen (couldnt be bothered to read) this really long piece by Prof Curtice - the bloke they have on for every election these days
This was the bit I focussed on (after he talked about it on TV this morning) :
True, as has been the position ever since our poll of polls series began at the beginning of 2018, the balance of support is now tilted in favour of Remain rather than, as in the referendum, in favour of Leave. Indeed, the current average of Remain 52%, Leave 48% is the exact mirror image of what emerged from the ballot boxes in June 2016.
However, this does not mean that there is a discernible, key group of Leave voters who have changed their minds about Brexit. That much becomes clear if, as in the table below, we examine separately the current vote intentions of those who voted Remain in 2016 and those who backed Leave. In both cases over 85% say they would vote exactly the same way as they did in 2016. The sound and fury of the last three years has left the vast majority of voters unmoved. And although 8% of those who backed Leave say that they would now vote Remain, they are counterbalanced by 8% of Remain supporters who indicate that they would now support Leave.
The principal reason why public opinion is now tilted towards Remain is because, as we have noted before, those who did not vote three years ago prefer Remain to Leave by around two to one (if they express a view at all). In part, at least, this reflects the fact that this group of abstainers consists disproportionately of younger voters who in general are more likely to back Remain. However, it also suggests that, far from being certain to produce a majority for Remain, the outcome of a second referendum could turn on the ability or otherwise of the Remain side to mobilise the support of a group of voters who cannot necessarily be relied upon to vote at all
... and if you or anybody else has too much time on their hands it comes from this monster article.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/author/johncurtice/
-
So it appears that the deal that is emerging is identical in principle to the one that May agreed with the EU in November 2018, and which the ERG and DUP said was unacceptable. (That's the one before the backstop was introduced.)
There'll be plenty of flannel claiming it's fundamentally different, which you can buy into if that's what you want. But it's the same deal.
-
Meanwhile, the UK economy continues t tank under the Tories.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1184097257693569027
Remember, Osborne said they would eliminate the deficit by 2015. Sensible economists said that wasn't possible. The IMF is now saying the deficit still won't be eliminated by 2024...
-
...the same sensible economists also said that the Austerity Osborne brought in to try to bring the deficit down would hammer the economy.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1184097608761040897
The IMF is now saying our economic growth won't hit 1.5% this side of 2024.
Remember, our average growth from 1950 to 2010, taking into account every recession and recovery was 2.3%. Since then, it's only matched that in ONE year, when Osborne engineered a mini-boom before the 2015 election.
If the IMF are right, by 2024, we'll have had 14 years of way below par growth. That sums to...
...are you sitting down because this is horrifying...
£2 TRILLION of lost economic output.
£32,000 for every person in the country. Lost. Forever. Because of the incompetence of the Tories. Utterly avoidable if we'd followed sensible economics after the Great Crash.
Thirty two grand for every man woman and child in the country.
-
And by the way, the same sensible economists who predicted that catastrophe have been telling you for the past 4 years that Brexit will be a disaster for the economy. But Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Duncan-Smith and Farage say they are wrong.
Who do you believe? Really, in your heart of hearts?
-
So it appears that the deal that is emerging is identical in principle to the one that May agreed with the EU in November 2018, and which the ERG and DUP said was unacceptable. (That's the one before the backstop was introduced.)
There'll be plenty of flannel claiming it's fundamentally different, which you can buy into if that's what you want. But it's the same deal.
Bigger sweetener for the DUP and their 292,000 votes and 10 seats ?
-
Be interesting to see if the DUP can be bought.
The deal will categorically treat NI differently to the rest of the UK. Last year, Foster said that was a blood-red line (a disgrace for an NI politician to say but there you go.) If they now accept this...
-
.... will fit in nicely with Johnson and his about faces
Here another
How come no UK journalists have bothered to dig this out: @BorisJohnson saying previously he'd EAT his ID if he was ever asked to produce it.
He's just announced in Queen's speech that ID will have to be shown to vote.
Journalists! Do. Your. Frigging. Job.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3613116/Ask-to-see-my-ID-card-and-Ill-eat-it.html …
-
Hang on. Deal on hold.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50072748
I'd bet the DUP has said no.
-
I still hang my head in despair at what is the biggest single political mess I have lived through WHICHEVER way you personally have voted.
I still hate people saying as Ian Duncan Smith did this morning " people write to me and talk to me and stop me on the street and just say - "lets just get this done" we have had a vote and we want it finished NOW"
I suspect he knows (or suspects that if a second Referendum turns up) the likely outcome to "finish it" would end in a Remain vote. The latest Poll of Polls shows Remain if offered would come out somewhere like 54 - 46 and thats why that abysmal bloke ......Baker MP just wants a "tolerable" deal that he and others can vote for rather than lose the prize they have worked , schemed and subverted the last Referendums result for
What a selfish git he and others like him are. Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
I'm not so sure the polls at all show that. The biggest was a Comres poll published this morning of 26000 people (big for a poll) which did not at all show that (42% for remain, 50% leave (out of 2 options), 8% don't knows. But it is just one poll.
But as you allude to, they've combined 2 leave options - the actual poll results were@
Leave with no deal - 20%
Leave with a deal - 30%
Remain - 42%
Don't know - 8%
Obviously if people were presented with a binary choice between Remain and Leave with no deal, then a significant proportion of the 30% who said Leave with a deal would actually switch to Remain.
So if you assume that 10% of that 30% are Remain and 20% are Leave, then you get Remain 52% and Leave 40% and Don't know 8%.
One thing that stood out in the survey was that of those surveyed who said that they hadn't voted in the 2016 referendum, 63% of them would ow favour the UK remaining in the EU.
https://www.comresglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ComRes_ITN_Brexit-Referendum-Poll_Oct-19-2.pdf
-
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1184529443471142913?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1184529443471142913?s=19)
Well done Brexiteers, the IRA are back.
-
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1184529443471142913?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1184529443471142913?s=19)
Well done Brexiteers, the IRA are back.
Really? Given there is no plan for it he whole story is rubbish isnt it?
Perhaps we should all see what the actual deal is if there is one first...
-
I still hang my head in despair at what is the biggest single political mess I have lived through WHICHEVER way you personally have voted.
I still hate people saying as Ian Duncan Smith did this morning " people write to me and talk to me and stop me on the street and just say - "lets just get this done" we have had a vote and we want it finished NOW"
I suspect he knows (or suspects that if a second Referendum turns up) the likely outcome to "finish it" would end in a Remain vote. The latest Poll of Polls shows Remain if offered would come out somewhere like 54 - 46 and thats why that abysmal bloke ......Baker MP just wants a "tolerable" deal that he and others can vote for rather than lose the prize they have worked , schemed and subverted the last Referendums result for
What a selfish git he and others like him are. Throw us to the Wolves so he / they can cheer their own greatness
I'm not so sure the polls at all show that. The biggest was a Comres poll published this morning of 26000 people (big for a poll) which did not at all show that (42% for remain, 50% leave (out of 2 options), 8% don't knows. But it is just one poll.
I have seen (couldnt be bothered to read) this really long piece by Prof Curtice - the bloke they have on for every election these days
This was the bit I focussed on (after he talked about it on TV this morning) :
True, as has been the position ever since our poll of polls series began at the beginning of 2018, the balance of support is now tilted in favour of Remain rather than, as in the referendum, in favour of Leave. Indeed, the current average of Remain 52%, Leave 48% is the exact mirror image of what emerged from the ballot boxes in June 2016.
However, this does not mean that there is a discernible, key group of Leave voters who have changed their minds about Brexit. That much becomes clear if, as in the table below, we examine separately the current vote intentions of those who voted Remain in 2016 and those who backed Leave. In both cases over 85% say they would vote exactly the same way as they did in 2016. The sound and fury of the last three years has left the vast majority of voters unmoved. And although 8% of those who backed Leave say that they would now vote Remain, they are counterbalanced by 8% of Remain supporters who indicate that they would now support Leave.
The principal reason why public opinion is now tilted towards Remain is because, as we have noted before, those who did not vote three years ago prefer Remain to Leave by around two to one (if they express a view at all). In part, at least, this reflects the fact that this group of abstainers consists disproportionately of younger voters who in general are more likely to back Remain. However, it also suggests that, far from being certain to produce a majority for Remain, the outcome of a second referendum could turn on the ability or otherwise of the Remain side to mobilise the support of a group of voters who cannot necessarily be relied upon to vote at all
... and if you or anybody else has too much time on their hands it comes from this monster article.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/author/johncurtice/
I did actually here him interviewed. Another key thing he said was around would these people actually vote? They usually dont.
I do feel that parliament will do everything they possibly can to stop a deal, something I suspect the pm is not too worried about.
-
I'm just hoping that none of this is true, but with a treacherous bas**rd like johnson ..................
Labour MP Stella Creasy has raised suspicions that the DUP are striking a Brexit bargain with the government that will include an attempt to stop expected abortion rights in Northern Ireland.
stellacreasy (@stellacreasy)
So that’s deal government has done to get @DUPleader support this week- they are going to wash their hands of responsibility to regulate abortion in Northern Ireland. It’s not in law they can whatever they say. Shameful using women as bargaining chips! #brexithaos #trustwomen
October 16, 2019
stellacreasy (@stellacreasy)
Now in parliament to try to find out why all of a sudden government trying to get Northern Ireland assembly up and running and using the possibility of stopping equal abortion access in Northern Ireland as bargaining chip…. #brexithaos #trustwomen
October 16, 2019
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1184461544064765957
https://mobile.twitter.com/biscuitsgod/status/1184457734336471045
Just how? How can anyone even for a second consider voting for him? How little self-respect must you have to allow yourself to be bullshitted like this and still support him?
-
Doesn't this comment sum up where we are - and where we are going:
part of the problem here is that the final stages of closing his deal require various people to trust Boris Johnson, and too many of them have actually met him.
https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/1184536876738400262
-
DUP have thrown their toys out at the 11th hour - and will still work with the Govet ....blah blah blah
Is that another bargaining tool to get ever MORE cash from Westminster ?
How much did they wring out for their support in forming a Tory Govt in first plave and secondly when the May deal was constructed ?
The 295000 people who voted for them (and got them 10 seats) could have all retired I bet having shared the booty out
-
Potentially is for them or that they wont back a deal.
That all leaves an extension and then an election? Given the polls and again this morning labour turning on itself and I doubt Boris will feel too worried.
-
Is labour turning on itself again this morning or is it just the press winding it up, do you have a link bfyp?
-
1 MP who was facing deselection leaves the party and that's a disaster.
21 Tory MPs get booted out last month including two ex-Chancellors and it's no big deal.
-
1 MP who was facing deselection leaves the party and that's a disaster.
21 Tory MPs get booted out last month including two ex-Chancellors and it's no big deal.
You think it plays well to the electorate that more than one labour MP has criticised the guy they'll be campaigning to make PM? She was ultimately hugely damning aswell. You only have to look on social media and labour activists are slamming her, shouldn't they actually listen to what she's saying? So much for tolerance etc.
The Tory MP's getting booted out was and remains a problem for them also, how can it not be?
Of course on brexit there are a number of other elements to consider. Will the DUP move? This may be their last shot at gaining anything and will BJ then get the vote through.
Labour will go for a referendum ammendment no doubt, will that get through? It may do and it may well win, what goes on the ballot etc, would the government allow it, can they not? What will the EU make of it?
Big mess to come no doubt.
It will also be interesting to see who votes for and against a Saturday sitting given the previous complaints of parliament not having a say.
-
There is a deal, but not yet a DUP, this will be dramatic.
I suspect BST will say Johnson wants to lose the vote and given he's gone without the DUP, you'd be hard pushed to disagree.
-
I don't thin he wants to lose a vote. That looks humiliating. If the DUP aren't on board, this won't go to a vote in the Commons. He'll say he tried his best but the EU wouldn't move on the final points.
-
IMHO Johnson wants no deal and to be able to blame anyone else but himself.
This latest deal faces voting down in parliament and I reckon BJ will pull the “it wasn’t me” tabloid-esque headlines to gain sympathy with the large parts of the public who don’t seem to look beyond the headlines..
-
It is his fault for not discussing with the other parties to find a deal a majority would vote for. It's always been about the DUP and ERG.
-
Maybe BST that would be the sensible view. Also IDM, BJ doesn't want no deal, he's not that stupid and if he is backed by money men as is often said that would never work, even with shorting there's no sensible market view that makes money out of that.
They are saying they're pushing it for Saturday, maybe he has the numbers, maybe he's gambling or maybe he has a rabbit up his sleave. Perhaps the EU will say it's this or no deal and in that circumstance he may get it through. I haven't read it so don't know what the details are, we will find out.
I do disagree with Corbyn's stance on this changing standards. The standards only change if a government change them, if he's that confident, this should be his chance to make them even better and achieve his policies....
-
It has to get through our parliament, and the EU parliament with lot's of new MEP's. If it is not agreed he will play the blame game, and it could be the hard Brexit.
The opposition are playing with fire, and probably their future as credible parties with much of the electorate, the popular press will vilify them and some mud will stick.
They for months have called Bojo a liar about wanting a deal, he has kicked the bucket from under their feet, the onus and pressure is all on them. A general election and leave without a deal is still on the agenda, and the Brexit party in the House of Commons with MP's.
-
From the BBC website.
"Michel Barnier tells the press conference there are four main elements to the part of the Brexit deal concerning Northern Ireland:
1.The island will remain aligned to a limited set of EU rules, meaning goods will be checked on entry to the island, rather than across a border on the island.
2. Northern Ireland will remain in the UK's customs territory, benefiting from the UK's future trade policy. but it will also remain an entry point into the single market.
3. Mr Barnier did not go into detail about what has been decided about VAT - a key sticking point of the deal for the DUP - but he says: "On this point also we have maintained the integrity of the single market but also satisfied the UK's legitimate wishes"
4 Four years after the enforcement of the deal, the elected representatives of Northern Ireland will be able to vote on whether or not to keep the arrangements in place."
So. In other words, this is the deal that May was in the verge of agreeing last year when the DUP said it was unacceptable.
And points 1 and 2 are precisely what Johnson was saying just 4 months ago were things that no Conservative govt could or should agree.
And that's a success is it?
-
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
-
This deal is basically Teresa May's deal with a slipshod arrangement for NI.
I can't see how it will get through Parliament.
-
The pressure to accept I think will come from the EU, industry abroad are just as fed up as ours, I think they will say that this is it accept or go to no deal at the end of the month.
-
I think there is every chance of that. A lot of minds should be focussed now that this may well be the least chance ever for a deal, particularly with a potential eye on an election.
I tend to agree with Nick Robinson's (BBC) points on twitter win-win for Johnson, deal and he delivers his 31st promise, no deal and he tells voters "look not my fault, I did a deal, they voted it down".
-
He is legally bound to seek an extension if there isn’t a deal in place, under the Benn act, isn’t he.?
I still believe he wants no deal, otherwise why did he try to shut down parliament to prevent them trying to block no deal.?
If the EU or parliament doesn’t agree this deal, and if the Benn Act is followed, but there are no alternative deals, what can we do.?
-
He is legally bound to seek an extension if there isn’t a deal in place, under the Benn act, isn’t he.?
I still believe he wants no deal, otherwise why did he try to shut down parliament to prevent them trying to block no deal.?
If the EU or parliament doesn’t agree this deal, and if the Benn Act is followed, but there are no alternative deals, what can we do.?
The EU could say no (unlikely).
General election (likely).
Referendum (potentially).
I can't quite figure out why such the big change in him, did they realise they couldn't just do what they wanted? Afterall BJ is all about himself he won't want to lose power. Was it genuinely all in the plan all along perhaps?
-
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
So why was Johnson dead set against this 12 and 4 months ago. What's changed since then?
DUP have now said that they're not voting for this deal. So it comes down to a dozen or so Labour MPs like Hoey, Mann and Flint.
-
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
So why was Johnson dead set against this 12 and 4 months ago. What's changed since then?
DUP have now said that they're not voting for this deal. So it comes down to a dozen or so Labour MPs like Hoey, Mann and Flint.
Million € question....
I'd say power, power, power.
Juncker has just given him a big boost though saying no extension. If the EU say that it's a done deal.
-
Juncker doesn't have the authority to make that decision. If the deal is voted down on Saturday, there is no way on earth the EU wouldn't agree to an extension.
-
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
So why was Johnson dead set against this 12 and 4 months ago. What's changed since then?
DUP have now said that they're not voting for this deal. So it comes down to a dozen or so Labour MPs like Hoey, Mann and Flint.
Million € question....
I'd say power, power, power.
Juncker has just given him a big boost though saying no extension. If the EU say that it's a done deal.
We've gone from them wanting to threaten the EU with no deal to threatening our own MPs with no deal.
-
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
So why was Johnson dead set against this 12 and 4 months ago. What's changed since then?
DUP have now said that they're not voting for this deal. So it comes down to a dozen or so Labour MPs like Hoey, Mann and Flint.
Million € question....
I'd say power, power, power.
Juncker has just given him a big boost though saying no extension. If the EU say that it's a done deal.
More rubbish from the Daily Mail perhaps? Juncker doesn't have the authority to do that.
-
Dont the EU have to approve an extension? What happens if they say no it needs to be sorted by the 31st
-
If they say no, and the Benn Act precludes no deal, then they either need to find another deal before 31 Oct or revoke article 50..
-
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1184834973662175234?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1184834973662175234?s=19)
Wtf
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
-
Juncker doesn't have the authority to make that decision. If the deal is voted down on Saturday, there is no way on earth the EU wouldn't agree to an extension.
Yes he doesn't, very hard to know who has and hasn't so rely on the press.
The numbers are actually quite tight in parliament, even without the DUP if he can convince all of the current Tories and independent Tories he doesn't need that many from Labour.
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
So when Parliament votes against this deal, it'll be because Boris has outmanoeuvred them..?
-
Juncker doesn't have the authority to make that decision. If the deal is voted down on Saturday, there is no way on earth the EU wouldn't agree to an extension.
Yes he doesn't, very hard to know who has and hasn't so rely on the press.
The numbers are actually quite tight in parliament, even without the DUP if he can convince all of the current Tories and independent Tories he doesn't need that many from Labour.
If he's without the DUP he'll also be without several of the ERG who have always said they'll only support a deal that the DUP also supports.
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
So...
Parliament rejects the deal..
BJ is forced to ask for an extension..
The EU says no extension, no new deal
Parliament debates no deal, rejects no deal.
The only option then is revoking article 50..
-
The opposition parties are toast in any future election if they follow that line, and they know it. self preservation and greed will now come to the fore.
They have set their sights on a deal for too long, adding that they respect the outcome of the referendum publically even in the last few weeks thinking that Bojo was not interested in a deal. he was lying when saying he wanted a deal, they would back a deal if it were offered, we want to work to a deal, there should be a cross party committee to get a deal, anything but no deal, now the covers are off, they want nothing less than staying in the EU against the electorates wishes.
Most better look in the vacancies column come the next election.
-
Interesting discussion on R4 earlier.
Suggesting Johnson knows damn well Parliament won't pass his deal because he knows the DUP can't support it. So he's doing this as positioning for the Election. "I've tried my best but Parliament won't play ball."
That's the only way you can make sense out of him turning 180 degrees on all the red lines he said he'd never break.
But he may have overplayed his hand here, now Labour are saying they'll whip to vote for Ref2.
On Saturday, if the deal gets voted down, it's looking very much like there'll be the numbers to vote for Ref2 straight after.
Interesting couple of days coming up.
-
Just how? How can anyone even for a second consider voting for him? How little self-respect must you have to allow yourself to be bullshitted like this and still support him?
It reads to me like a compromise, some wins, some not. It feels like a fairly sensible deal on the face of it no?
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
So...
Parliament rejects the deal..
BJ is forced to ask for an extension..
The EU says no extension, no new deal
Parliament debates no deal, rejects no deal.
The only option then is revoking article 50..
Still wrong, default legal position is to leave 31st, Benn act requires pm to seek extension if the deal is not passed by parliament or a no deal brexit is not approved by parliament by Saturday. If EU do not agree to an extension we leave with no deal
-
Billy, that is the first time I have thought you are grasping at straws.
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
So...
Parliament rejects the deal..
BJ is forced to ask for an extension..
The EU says no extension, no new deal
Parliament debates no deal, rejects no deal.
The only option then is revoking article 50..
Still wrong, default legal position is to leave 31st, Benn act requires pm to seek extension if the deal is not passed by parliament or a no deal brexit is not approved by parliament by Saturday. If EU do not agree to an extension we leave with no deal
You think Parliament will allow that.?
-
If the EU reject an extension parliament has no choice
-
IDM, the So called Ben act has no jurisdiction on the EU, if they say it is this deal or no deal, and bear in mind they are happy with the agreement because it suits them, they will threaten the no deal as an alternative and throw their mates to the Lions.
The EU industrialists are thoroughly fed up and starting to make waves, The EU threat to the city has dissipated, and was a non starter anyway.
It is beginning to look as though Boso and his advisory have completely out manoeuvred the opposition and is just letting them back themselves into a corner screaming and shouting.
So...
Parliament rejects the deal..
BJ is forced to ask for an extension..
The EU says no extension, no new deal
Parliament debates no deal, rejects no deal.
The only option then is revoking article 50..
Still wrong, default legal position is to leave 31st, Benn act requires pm to seek extension if the deal is not passed by parliament or a no deal brexit is not approved by parliament by Saturday. If EU do not agree to an extension we leave with no deal
You think Parliament will allow that.?
How can they stop it? Some of you are starting to sound desperate now.
-
I'd consider it. Any deal is better than no deal.
-
I'd consider it. Any deal is better than no deal.
You are Boris Johnson and I claim my used kipper/pork pie/bit of everest that collapsed in 2014....
-
If the EU reject an extension parliament has no choice
It has the choice to vote to revoke.
-
So the big red bus such a favourite with johnson looks like it's going to back over him?
''EU leaves door open to Brexit extension, in blow to Boris Johnson
Member states decline to follow Jean-Claude Juncker, who ‘ruled out’ further delay''
looks like junker didn't have the authority after all aye, who got that correct?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/17/boris-johnson-and-eu-reach-brexit-deal-without-dup-backing
-
I'd consider it. Any deal is better than no deal.
You are Boris Johnson and I claim my used kipper/pork pie/bit of everest that collapsed in 2014....
Anyone with half a brain knows stopping everything including medicine from one moment is suicide for a country. Anything where we carrying on receiving goods and the services which were used to is the same option. There is no reason for Brexit, no positive but I'm fine with it to happen as long as we get a deal just to make the ridiculous 52% of the voters happy.
-
but that won't make them happy Donny, they want to take back control, massive trade deals where we sell goods at a top price and buy at next to nothing, where every day is summer, beer and skittles and all that.
-
There will not be a No Deal outcome.
Full stop.
If Parliament votes down the deal on Saturday, Johnson MUST apply for an extension and the EU will grant it.
Full stop.
In the vanishingly small probability case that the EU didn't grant it, there would be time for Parliament to vote to cancel A50. That would be a very bad situation, and a bad thing to do, but infinitely better than No Deal and Parliament would vote to revoke A50.
Then we would really be in a shocking place socially. But at least we'd still have food in the shops.
-
I didn't think that was possible bst?
''On 29 March 2017, the EU Commission stated "It is up to the United Kingdom to trigger Article 50. But once triggered, it cannot be unilaterally reversed. Notification is a point of no return. Article 50 does not provide for the unilateral withdrawal of notification''
-
I'd consider it. Any deal is better than no deal.
You are Boris Johnson and I claim my used kipper/pork pie/bit of everest that collapsed in 2014....
Anyone with half a brain knows stopping everything including medicine from one moment is suicide for a country. Anything where we carrying on receiving goods and the services which were used to is the same option. There is no reason for Brexit, no positive but I'm fine with it to happen as long as we get a deal just to make the ridiculous 52% of the voters happy.
That's his plan. Without the DUP he needs 20-30 Tory Remain & Labour Leave MP's to think the same way as you do to get his deal passed by ignoring the consequences of it.
No deal won't happen. It wouldn't happen last week, it wont happen on 31st October and it wont happen on Saturday. The only way it will happen is if Farage wins the next election and you can judge the likelihood of that yourself.
I reckon it will be close. I see the ERG are beginning to abandon the DUP they said they would never abandon as long ago as yesterday.
-
I didn't think that was possible bst?
''On 29 March 2017, the EU Commission stated "It is up to the United Kingdom to trigger Article 50. But once triggered, it cannot be unilaterally reversed. Notification is a point of no return. Article 50 does not provide for the unilateral withdrawal of notification''
It went to court and we can revoke it.
-
This is shocking reporting from the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50086218
Most people only read the first few Iines of a news article. This reads like a celebration of Johnson's deal.
And then it says "However, he had to cede some ground." .
Which, in the real world, translates as "However, he had to renege on every red line he's drawn over the past two years, and betray the DUP with an arrangement that only 4 months ago he said would never be acceptable to a Tory PM."
Awful, awful reporting.
-
Wilts.
Apparently the Tory Chief Whip has calculated that, if the DUP voted for the deal, every Tory-whipped MP votes for it and the Lab and Independent MPs they think will lean that way vote for it, they will win by 1 vote.
If the DUP opposes the deal (and how can they not?) it's lost.
-
I didn't think that was possible bst?
''On 29 March 2017, the EU Commission stated "It is up to the United Kingdom to trigger Article 50. But once triggered, it cannot be unilaterally reversed. Notification is a point of no return. Article 50 does not provide for the unilateral withdrawal of notification''
It went to court and we can revoke it.
Thanks DO, I missed that bit obviously
-
Wilts.
Apparently the Tory Chief Whip has calculated that, if the DUP voted for the deal, every Tory-whipped MP votes for it and the Lab and Independent MPs they think will lean that way vote for it, they will win by 1 vote.
If the DUP opposes the deal (and how can they not?) it's lost.
This bloke reckons it will be a tie!
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK
This is his spreadsheet. I reckon he has overestimated the Labour MP's voting for it - and Rory Stewart might struggle in the campaign for London Mayor if he does.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ktqCioirDDTRnnWd-1WHuA-7mvjuA5C3rTTrYpZ7mkA/edit#gid=58425768
-
I would think that any Labour MP voting for the Johnson deal, and setting aside environmental protection and workers rights, has no future in the party.
Some are leaving anyway, like Hoey and Mann, but people like Flint and Kinnock need to think very carefully.
-
Albie, Labour or any other elected party could always win a general election, and as we would not be a member of the EU they could bring in any workers rights laws, or any other laws they wanted to as the elected government of an independent self governing country.
They probably wouldn't though, and they are not even making that point to the electorate that they could, because it doesn't fit with their agenda.
That is the trouble people are not thinking what they could do, and are too used to other people doing the hard miles for them. If we stay in nobody is telling people that the agreement that Thatcher negotiated on our payments finishes in 2021 and our payments will go up over 50% if all 27 countries don't agree to extend the existing agreement, the likely hood of that being zilch, making the amount on the side of the bus even larger.
The one thing the remain side have done is negate any benefits of getting out by continually stating the negatives, there are negatives to staying in that need highlighting, and could cost more than getting out, and the bill will be presented sooner than people think if we do stay in.
-
Wilts.
Apparently the Tory Chief Whip has calculated that, if the DUP voted for the deal, every Tory-whipped MP votes for it and the Lab and Independent MPs they think will lean that way vote for it, they will win by 1 vote.
If the DUP opposes the deal (and how can they not?) it's lost.
This bloke reckons it will be a tie!
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK
This is his spreadsheet. I reckon he has overestimated the Labour MP's voting for it - and Rory Stewart might struggle in the campaign for London Mayor if he does.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ktqCioirDDTRnnWd-1WHuA-7mvjuA5C3rTTrYpZ7mkA/edit#gid=58425768
That could mean that breaking the deadlock might be Bercow's last action as Speaker!
-
Selby,
The point I was making is that current protections will be lost.
The Labour Party has spent years working towards basic protections at work, and environmental standards.
Removing these and making them subject to a government working on 5 year time lines is the WORST thing you could possibly do.
It gives no continuity for long term planning, and makes alignment with international standards (advantageous for trade deal negotiations) much more complicated.
There is no upside, unless you think contracting out to US corporations is the way to go.
That is the Johnson plan, and it is not in the interests of the working people of the UK.
-
Selby: '' The one thing the remain side have done is negate any benefits of getting out by continually stating the negatives, there are negatives to staying in that need highlighting, and could cost more than getting out, and the bill will be presented sooner than people think if we do stay in''
Respectfully I think you're a little confused Selby, the remain side have been begging all those on this forum to tell us what the benefits of leaving are which apart from HA's proposal to nationalise the railways (to which I agree) there has been little else forthcoming.
Without further ado, please tell us what the benefits are, balanced against the massive benefits of staying in of course.
-
If they agree to an election, and were elected, they would be in power before the transition period ends, and could introduce any law they wanted to before the end of that period in which we have agreed to uphold EU standards.
The problem is Labour are running scared of an election, and at the moment are all wind and no substance, with a leader that is unelectable, and a north south divide that will end the party as we know it.
-
I have just told you, any elected government could introduce any legislation they wanted to, be it employment law, or anything. They could introduce a proper living wage to be paid to any worker, they could outlaw zero hour contracts, anything they wanted, the only people they would be responsible to would be the electorate.
-
Selby
As people keep on pointing out to you, things like environmental and product and workers' rights regulations are not the sorts of things you change on the whim of whoever is in power, then change back in 5 years time when the other lot get in. That would be a disaster for business planning.
Who is going to invest in factories that make Widget A, based on the standards of today if those standards are liable to change drastically in 5 years time? Widget A might be illegal if the regulations are hardened. Or might be half the price to produce in a sweatshop if regulations are relaxed.
That's why you take a decades long approach to changing them. And you set minimum standards applicable across a wide range of economies so you don't get a race to the bottom.
Your attitude to this issue is, frankly, indicative of the entire Brexiters approach. Massively simplify. Don't engage with detail. Assume anyone who does is acting in bad faith.
If I could, I'd let you lot HAVE Brexit and deal with the shit it will unleash. If I could insulate the folk who don't deserve to be hurt by it, I'd wave you off gladly into the Brexit future. You deserve it.
-
Billy, are you telling me that the party you support are incapable of governing well enough to be re-elected, or that they are incapable of making this country a better place to live in.
Oh I forgot, last week most of you were saying we can't get a deal.
-
No selby. You are telling us the party you support are going to rip up as many worker's rights and environmental protections as they can get away with and you don't care.
BTW last week we couldn't get a deal. Johnson caved in and gave the EU everything they asked for, that's why there's a deal.
-
Selby.
Here's a good life tip. Read what people actually say instead of what you want them to say.
-
Billy, I don't want labour to get in for ten years thinking about it, look what they caused last time, there was nothing left.
-
More genius reporting from the BBC.
"an important point of principle for Mr Johnson is that Northern Ireland will leave the EU's customs union with the rest of the UK.
"It will continue to apply EU rules on customs, tariffs and regulations under the auspices of the European Court of Justice."
It's the most transparent, mendacious political spin I've ever seen.
It's Ike saying Donny Rovers will leave the English Football League, but continue to play English Football League matches under the auspices and rules of the English Football League.
-
Do you mean to say that the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU are ripping us off?
-
Do you mean to say that the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU are ripping us off?
It means Johnson can't even get a good a deal as May did. He's trying to totally f*ck the country up the arse with this deal and some folk on here are already touching their toes.
-
Do you mean to say that the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU are ripping us off?
It means Johnson can't even get a good a deal as May did. He's trying to totally f*ck the country up the arse with this deal and some folk on here are already touching their toes.
But surely the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU wouldn't want to rip us off?
-
Do you mean to say that the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU are ripping us off?
It means Johnson can't even get a good a deal as May did. He's trying to totally f*ck the country up the arse with this deal and some folk on here are already touching their toes.
But surely the wonderful, honest, understanding, caring EU wouldn't want to rip us off?
According to the Brexit Party they haven't - because this deal isn't Brexit. You Leavers who wanted to respect the referendum result must be fuming?
https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1184966623964422149
-
Michael Dougan, professor of European law at University of Liverpool, has this interesting Twitter thread breaking down Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, the majority of which “remains identical to that finalised by Theresa May”. It’s worth a read.
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
1) vast majority of Withdrawal Agreement remains identical to that finalised by Theresa May – the one that was repeatedly denounced by so many Brexiters (vassal state, money down drain etc) & justifiably criticised by sane commentators (esp flawed citizens’ rights regime)
October 17, 2019
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
3) How? NI will remain subject to large swathes of EU legislation on customs, VAT, goods, energy, state aid etc; on dynamic basis / in accordance with ECJ caselaw. Many of the rules will be enforced by UK bodies, but EU will also exercise various powers / roles in respect of NI.
October 17, 2019
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
5) After all: requires nightmarish system for determining / administering which goods pay EU / UK / no customs duties. Effectively based on presumption that EU duties should apply unless & until proved otherwise – followed by burdensome system of refunds by UK authorities.
October 17, 2019
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
7) … unless NI institutions later decide that "backstop" regime should be terminated. But DUP can’t veto extension of Protocol into the future: boohoo. Instead, on rolling basis: cross-community support = 8 year prolongation; though simple majority = still 4 year continuation
October 17, 2019
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
9) Last/not least: revised Political Declaration remains much same but with few tweaks intended to increase future distance between EU/UK. Of course, they don’t matter very much: document isn’t binding; might never be agreement; might take many years; might look very different.
October 17, 2019
Michael Dougan (@mdouganlpool)
11) Conclusion? EU has strong interest in promoting this agreement as way to avoid chaotic withdrawal. Fair enough: within its prerogative / in its interests. But for UK: this "new deal" also lays ground for Johnson & Co to plough ahead with their damaging and dangerous Brexit.
October 17, 2019
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/oct/18/boris-johnson-launches-frantic-sales-pitch-of-brexit-deal-ahead-of-commons-vote-politics-live
-
DUP confirms it will vote against deal (7.28am)
The DUP will “absolutely” be voting against the deal when it comes to the House of Commons, the party’s Brexit spokesman, Sammy Wilson, has said, contradicting a suggestion earlier from Peter Bone that the unionist party might be willing to support it.
“Why would we when this deal goes against everything, first of all that the government promised they would do to Northern Ireland,” Wilson told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
“A syphoning off from the rest of the United Kingdom and putting a border down the Irish Sea, in addition to extra costs for Northern Ireland’s businesses.”
Wilson added that the party would vote as a block and that there was no question of abstaining. The party had already been having conversations with Tory MPs and encouraging them to vote with the DUP “to protect the union”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/oct/18/boris-johnson-launches-frantic-sales-pitch-of-brexit-deal-ahead-of-commons-vote-politics-live
-
As johnson attempts a poor imitation of the Andy Serkis in the wetwipes vid and tries to persuade enough MPs that black is in fact white ......
Scottish Court to review bid to stop 'illegal' Brexit deal
''Scotland's highest civil court is set to consider a legal bid to stop the UK government from passing its proposed EU withdrawal agreement.
Anti-Brexit campaigners believe it contravenes legislation preventing Northern Ireland forming part of a separate customs territory.
Campaigner Jo Maugham QC confirmed the petition was lodged at the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Thursday''
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-50088993
-
It seems likely to be less than a handful of votes in it. Interesting day ahead, there will be many MPs who are thinking about what to do, largely thinking about if I vote yes to the deal is this the end of it....
Do not forget in the long term if BJ carries his party in the vote he has a massive potential election campaign of back the deal and give me a mandate. Whatever happens he's defeated the "he only wants no deal narrative" and he cannot possibly now push for that given it's his deal.
Sturgeon has this conspiracy theory;
Hope I’m wrong but I have a real suspicion that Labour would be quite happy to see this deal go through. They will officially oppose but give nod to ‘rebels’ to ensure numbers there to pass. It will be the end of them in Scotland if they do end up facilitating Brexit.
-
If they agree to an election, and were elected, they would be in power before the transition period ends, and could introduce any law they wanted to before the end of that period in which we have agreed to uphold EU standards.
The problem is Labour are running scared of an election, and at the moment are all wind and no substance, with a leader that is unelectable, and a north south divide that will end the party as we know it.
Eh? Have you recently come out of a coma? They've said they'd agree to one as soon as Brexit was extended so we didn't fall into no deal. They're not "scared" and you just look daft saying that.
-
Really DO? You think they'll do that? Right now they'll get slaughtered in an election. If the deal passes tomorrow big if, what does their brexit policy become?
-
Really DO? You think they'll do that? Right now they'll get slaughtered in an election. If the deal passes tomorrow big if, what does their brexit policy become?
We need policies................... fook?
-
Back to my old issue about there being no such things as "Leave" and therefore the 2016 vote being illegitimate.
Johnson is today saying "This is a great Brexit deal which takes back control."
Sammy Wilson of the DUP and Farage have both said this is not Brexit.
That kind of nails what I e been saying for 3 years. The "Leave" vote wasn't a vote for a specific thing. It was an umbrella of many different, mutually incompatible things.
You CANNOT assume that anyone who voted for Leave would accept ANY form of Leave. That's obvious.
What's happened since 2016 is various right wing MPs insisting that the Leave vote meant support for their specific form of Leave. An unclear vote has been hijacked.
So there is only one possible democratic solution. Ref2 with a choice between Remain and a SPECIFIC form of Leave.
-
Back to my old issue about there being no such things as "Leave" and therefore the 2016 vote being illegitimate.
You CANNOT assume that anyone who voted for Leave would accept ANY form of Leave. That's obvious.
So there is only one possible democratic solution. Ref2 with a choice between Remain and a SPECIFIC form of Leave.
That is what should be done but probably wont be.
Dominic Grive has spoken a lot of sense throughout this and his stance is just that
He will vote for Johnsons deal as long as there is a chance for a Public confirmation to accept of endorse it and he thinks many many more MPs would do
He said the Vote should be held with these questions
a THE DEAL
b NO DEAL
c REMAIN
However he conceded that a lot of people would not mind if NO DEAL was omitted
It would be fairer (he said) because its nearly 4 years since the original Referendum was held and so much has been learned - many Voters might have changed their minds (both ways) many Voters have -well- died- and over 2 million people have become eligible to Vote now and (he said) they were on the whole Remainers
Got to go shopping calls !
-
Erm what's the form of remain, the one we have now or the remain actually proposed in the first referendum (which was remain with changes)?
How many options do you go with?
-
I saw this earlier - made me slightly mad.....
#Labour MP Chris Bryant has stated MP's should be given financial help to pay for childcare because they have to attend the House of Commons on a Saturday.
-
I saw this earlier - made me slightly mad.....
#Labour MP Chris Bryant has stated MP's should be given financial help to pay for childcare because they have to attend the House of Commons on a Saturday.
They should be given exactly the same state childcare help as anyone else who needs it.
-
I saw this earlier - made me slightly mad.....
#Labour MP Chris Bryant has stated MP's should be given financial help to pay for childcare because they have to attend the House of Commons on a Saturday.
They should be given exactly the same state childcare help as anyone else who needs it.
Bugger all then....
This afternoon Varadkar and Macron have stated between them their opposition to extension that should focus minds. But, they havent said they'll say no. The risk is there though.
One irony I like is that SNP have said it would be England taking Scotland out of the EU against their will. The irony is if the vote does lose by a small amount tomorrow it would be Scottish and NI MP's keeping England in the EU against their will. Somewhat ironic for the Tories that.
-
Stick or twist time, the pressure as I thought coming from the EU now, the big hitters joining the game.
A big choice trust Boris, or will they really not extend the date? that is the question, would you trust Macron?
-
Brilliant twitter comment.
"Boris Johnson's deal requires a lot of people to trust him. Which is difficult, as many of them have actually met him..."
-
I saw this earlier - made me slightly mad.....
#Labour MP Chris Bryant has stated MP's should be given financial help to pay for childcare because they have to attend the House of Commons on a Saturday.
I also saw a Labour MP say when interviewed "I will vote for a Deal just to honour the Referendum"
But said the interviewer "your constituency voted 70%+ to REMAIN - so how do you reconcile that?" I am not their advocate he said and I BELIEVE to vote for this deal will put an end to this once and for all and I do it for the good of all the Country
Ironic as lots of us on here are represented by Ms Flint who will (has) voted for the Deal because she wants to put the Country first and will vote to honour the Referendum result because she has a Constituency which voted to Leave
Can someone put them in a small room to sort it out
-
Confirming what others have said:
''How much of Johnson's 'great new deal' is actually new?
Guardian analysis shows less than 5% of the original deal has been renegotiated. What has been removed from May’s deal and what has replaced it?''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/oct/18/how-much-johnson-great-new-deal-actually-new
-
Sarah Champion is a disgrace.
She is voting for the Deal, because she says that EU have made it clear that there will be no further extension of A50. So it's a case of Deal or No Deal.
Absolute, utter, 100% pure b*llocks. Lying through her teeth to justify betraying Labour supporters. She's a disgrace to politics.
I could accept her using an intelligent argument about why she chose to vote for the deal as opposed to any other outcome. But she's not. She's lying about what the EU has said and she's using that to mislead her constituents.
-
Some Labour MP's seem to think that propping up Johnson is justified by votes cast in an advisory referendum over 3 years ago.
That means:
privatisation of the NHS
abolition of workers rights
removal of environmental safeguards
more off shore banking frauds
deregulation across the economy
etc, etc.
So that is what they will be enabling.....completely against the core values of the Labour Party!
Anyway, does anyone fancy a drop of Letwin;
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-parliaments-50098128
Cometh the hour!
-
Brilliant twitter comment.
"Boris Johnson's deal requires a lot of people to trust him. Which is difficult, as many of them have actually met him..."
I am sure I read that on here yesterday...
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg914137#msg914137
-
Good article on the "Great British Asset Striptease" which Johnson and Co are planning to unleash;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/britain-after-brexit-welcome-vulture-restaurant/
Just so you know, like!
-
Brilliant twitter comment.
"Boris Johnson's deal requires a lot of people to trust him. Which is difficult, as many of them have actually met him..."
I am sure I read that on here yesterday...
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=268078.msg914137#msg914137
So you did.
-
Really DO? You think they'll do that? Right now they'll get slaughtered in an election. If the deal passes tomorrow big if, what does their brexit policy become?
If the Letwin ammendment passes tomorrow and then Labour vote for the deal as ammended - what then does Johnson's message on Labour & Brexit become?
Or in an even more bizarre scenario - if the deal gets amended and Labour vote for it and the Tories against - what then does Johnson's message on Labour & Brexit become?
-
And just to emphasise what a mendacious t**t Champion is, here's a prominent far right Tory letting the cat out the bag.
https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1185166530490916872
-
Really DO? You think they'll do that? Right now they'll get slaughtered in an election. If the deal passes tomorrow big if, what does their brexit policy become?
If the Letwin ammendment passes tomorrow and then Labour vote for the deal as ammended - what then does Johnson's message on Labour & Brexit become?
Or in an even more bizarre scenario - if the deal gets amended and Labour vote for it and the Tories against - what then does Johnson's message on Labour & Brexit become?
Fairly simple, pass the legislation and get it done?
-
That would be the default position thou if the talks failed is he not just clarifying that that would be the case and not that we would remain in the eu?
-
Is that remain with no rebate (probably next year) or stay in with the rebate with the other 27 having a vote on that, so next to no chance. So an extra 50% plus payment on top of what we already pay to be a member.
-
Interesting bit of research
Why, even in leave constituencies, most Labour support comes from remainers
On the World at One Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the Commons, said he thought Labour MPs in seats that voted leave might want to back the PM’s Brexit deal. He said:
There are Labour MPs in seats that voted 60, 70% to leave and they will, of their own volition, regardless of anything I could say to them, be thinking about how do they best represent their own voters.
In fact new research from the British Election Study, which studies voting behaviour in considerable detail through an extensive database going back years, suggests that Rees-Mogg is wrong. Even in constituencies that voted leave in 2016 by large majorities, the people voting Labour are predominantly remain supporters, the research found.
Here is an extract from Ed Fieldhouse’s write-up for the British Election Study website. (I have highlighted some of the highlights in bold)
First, while 68% of Labour voters voted to remain in the EU in 2016, what about voters in those seats which voted to Leave the EU? Dividing countries in to leave and remain seats and subdividing by the 2017 winner, the BES data shows that in Labour seats where there was a leave majority, 60% of Labour voters voted to remain in 2016 compared to 76% in remain seats. In other words while unsurprisingly there were more Labour leave voters in leave seats, on average there was still a substantial remain majority. Even in those with a leave vote of greater than 60%, a clear majority (57%) of Labour voters voted remain in 2016.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/oct/18/boris-johnson-launches-frantic-sales-pitch-of-brexit-deal-ahead-of
-
Surely by now even the most rusted on tory supporters would have to admit the the Benn Act and the Letwin Ammendment were only created because johnson is a despicable character that can't be trusted?
-
Bizarrely he is a despicable character and would sell anyone up the river for his own ends which is proven already on here and elsewhere ... but there will be enough of "them" that will trust him ... and / or have been bought off with (yet more) empty promises
-
Surely by now even the most rusted on tory supporters would have to admit the the Benn Act and the Letwin Ammendment were only created because johnson is a despicable character that can't be trusted?
Aye, Letwin has such a great record at implementing his legislation...
As someone who wants a deal a short delay if that was the true purpose is fine. But not many leave voters can actually trust mps to get it done either.
I do personally agree with your point though he has made a rod for his own back. The electorate of course wont just vote based on that.
-
Hope Milliband represents his labour constituents of Doncaster North well today. 72 percent leave. Big majority voted leave. Big majority voted labour in GE
-
Padge, look at the Askern photo page what his electorate think of Mr Milliband, I think he is on his last legs there.
-
No labour candidate in doncaster north will ever lose, ever!
-
Hope Milliband represents his labour constituents of Doncaster North well today. 72 percent leave. Big majority voted leave. Big majority voted labour in GE
So if they were offered to leave with the shittest deal possible they should accept because Doncaster North voted to leave? They shouldn't reject because it's a bad deal in hopes for something else?
-
That's a more sensible option DO, if we have to suffer a deal rather than remain it should be the best possible not just cos of a corrupt vote or that ppl are fed up, you have to remember who brought this on why they did and why we are still debating it.
-
As a remainer thou Sydney no matter what deal is put forward you will say it’s a bad deal and should be rejected and anything the tories put forward you will say is wrong and corrupt,I hope it goes thru it’s gone on to long and if not will just take up years more, there has to be a end to it
-
Sorry bpool but it wont be the end to it. Of anything. What they are discussing today are the terms on our withdrawal which will be the beginning of the discussions for a new trade deal.
In the meantime we also have to pass the necessary legislation to replace EU law in this country. Which is I think 8 large bills and a number of smaller ones.
Estimates are we will be lucky to conclude these discussions in 4 years - more likely 10.
-
The only way to end this quickly is to bin the whole shit storm as quickly as possible. As political commentators have told us repeatedly, voting the political declaration through will only mean more years of deal-making. A never ending cycle of Brexit dominating the news.
Edit: Apologies, Wilts. I wrote this before seeing your better explanation.
-
MPs need to decide if this deal offers a satisfactory way to respect the referendum result.
This is all arse about face. The deal should have been negotiated with the EU and agreed in Parliament before invoking Article 50, then you’ve automatically got two years transition time.
-
It’s looking like this deal will pass
-
It’s looking like this deal will pass
Probably only because of fatigue with it all, if May's deal went back it'd probably get through. You can't base our future just on people wanting it to be over.
-
It’s looking like this deal will pass
Probably only because of fatigue with it all, if May's deal went back it'd probably get through. You can't base our future just on people wanting it to be over.
The country voted to leave ( majority ) in the name of democracy this deal has to go through.
If it doesn’t it it a betrayal of the referendum result.
Corbin and Macdonald don’t want Brexit end of. They have their own political agenda.
Most Labour MP’s are not representing their constituents who voted in large majorities to leave.65/70% in many northern constituencies.
IMO they are a disgrace to democracy.
AND YES I VOTED TO REMAIN.
THE COUNTRY VOTED TO LEAVE SO WE MUST LEAVE NOW WITH THIS DEAL.
If we don’t the EU will wash their hands of us & we will be a laughing stock.
-
What’s worse, leaving with no deal, leaving with a bad deal, or not leaving at all.??
If the right answer is leaving with a good deal, then that’s what we must continue to try and do, even if that means more extensions..
-
MPs need to decide if this deal offers a satisfactory way to respect the referendum result.
This is all arse about face. The deal should have been negotiated with the EU and agreed in Parliament before invoking Article 50, then you’ve automatically got two years transition time.
A common thing oft forgotten is that the EU wouldnt do that. Theresa may wanted talks first.
An article here confirming back from a few years back.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/03/eu-commission-still-refuses-uk-talks-before-article-50-triggered
My hunch will be Letwin passes and it moves on again.
-
What’s worse, leaving with no deal, leaving with a bad deal, or not leaving at all.??
If the right answer is leaving with a good deal, then that’s what we must continue to try and do, even if that means more extensions..
What’s a good deal? We are not going to get any other deal are we. This is it, accept it and let’s move on.
All the scare mongering from hard core remainers is just that imo.
The Uk will not collapse in a heap if we leave the EU. They will still want to trade with us. We are the 2nd biggest economy in Europe. It’s a joke.
If we don’t do this today when will it get done. The British people have had enough of this fiasco.
We need to move on and deal with the things that matter to people. Health service, Education, Law and order, Social care, etc etc.
-
I wish Ian Blackford was Labour leader.
He's facking brilliant.
-
What’s worse, leaving with no deal, leaving with a bad deal, or not leaving at all.??
If the right answer is leaving with a good deal, then that’s what we must continue to try and do, even if that means more extensions..
What’s a good deal? We are not going to get any other deal are we. This is it, accept it and let’s move on.
All the scare mongering from hard core remainers is just that imo.
The Uk will not collapse in a heap if we leave the EU. They will still want to trade with us. We are the 2nd biggest economy in Europe. It’s a joke.
If we don’t do this today when will it get done. The British people have had enough of this fiasco.
We need to move on and deal with the things that matter to people. Health service, Education, Law and order, Social care, etc etc.
I would love to move on - I am heartily sick of hearing about the s**t storm so much so that I try never to speak or type the word B****t
I also believe that the British people are heartily sick of it and wish to "move on" and so I would advocate putting the Deal as it stands back to the people - with a simple Question Deal or Remain
In that way we would know once and for all if there was a majority (still) to Leave. I dont think that would be too much to ask of the hierarchy of Johnson and co surely ?
-
What’s worse, leaving with no deal, leaving with a bad deal, or not leaving at all.??
If the right answer is leaving with a good deal, then that’s what we must continue to try and do, even if that means more extensions..
What’s a good deal? We are not going to get any other deal are we. This is it, accept it and let’s move on.
All the scare mongering from hard core remainers is just that imo.
The Uk will not collapse in a heap if we leave the EU. They will still want to trade with us. We are the 2nd biggest economy in Europe. It’s a joke.
If we don’t do this today when will it get done. The British people have had enough of this fiasco.
We need to move on and deal with the things that matter to people. Health service, Education, Law and order, Social care, etc etc.
I have no idea what a good deal is, I’m not an economist, industrialist, financier nor politician.
This is something we have to get right..
-
I wish Ian Blackford was Labour leader.
He's facking brilliant.
The SNP arguments are full of inconsistency but you cant help but admire their fight for the cause and caring about a single issue so much.
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
-
And after 5 years when we know if it was good or bad, do we et another chance to correct it.?
We do with a GE, therefore it is imperative we get it right first time.
If that cannot be done, then go back to the voters.. don’t forget it was a lot less than that voted leave as a percentage of the electorate, and the electorate has changed significantly in the intervening 3 and a half years..
Enjoy the game - I can’t make it today - at least we will agree on wanting a good performance and three points.!
-
And after 5 years when we know if it was good or bad, do we et another chance to correct it.?
We do with a GE, therefore it is imperative we get it right first time.
If that cannot be done, then go back to the voters.. don’t forget it was a lot less than that voted leave as a percentage of the electorate, and the electorate has changed significantly in the intervening 3 and a half years..
Enjoy the game - I can’t make it today - at least we will agree on wanting a good performance and three points.!
Seeing as it takes some trade years 5-10 years to be done I doubt we'll be in a reasonable position 5 years from now.
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
-
What’s worse, leaving with no deal, leaving with a bad deal, or not leaving at all.??
If the right answer is leaving with a good deal, then that’s what we must continue to try and do, even if that means more extensions..
What’s a good deal? We are not going to get any other deal are we. This is it, accept it and let’s move on.
All the scare mongering from hard core remainers is just that imo.
The Uk will not collapse in a heap if we leave the EU. They will still want to trade with us. We are the 2nd biggest economy in Europe. It’s a joke.
If we don’t do this today when will it get done. The British people have had enough of this fiasco.
We need to move on and deal with the things that matter to people. Health service, Education, Law and order, Social care, etc etc.
Not when Brexit makes it cheaper for the EU to buy from someone else who are still in the Single Market. And that being the case, the UK being the second biggest economy will mean feck all to them.
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
-
If you say you're not going to f#ck with workers rights then why don't you write them into the deal to say that you are going to maintain them to the same level as the EU, dead easy.
''What Johnson's deal means for workers' rights, the NHS and the economy''
Why are workers’ rights at stake in Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal?
The PM’s renegotiated deal opens the way to a much looser relationship with the EU than envisaged by his predecessor, Theresa May, and allows for more “divergence” with EU regulations.
As such, instead of writing into the legally binding withdrawal agreement that the UK will abide by EU standards on workers’ rights and the environment, these “level playing field” commitments have been shifted to the forward-looking political declaration.
In practice, it will be up to the government that negotiates the free trade deal – most likely after a general election – to decide how strong a commitment to EU rules it is prepared to make.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/19/what-johnson-deal-means-for-workers-rights-the-nhs-and-the-economy-brexit
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
But not the effects of leaving.
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
How many who voted leave actually read and acknowledged the leave manifesto and the promises they made.?
It is a very simplistic thing to say that leave meant leave, but it’s far too complex a process as has become apparent since..
It’s like saying we need a striker, we’ve decided we’re going to get one, then we go sign some beer swilling lard arse who barely makes it off the bench in Sunday league - but is technically a striker..
Bad analogy.?
If we as fans can see that signing a striker is not that straightforward, how the hell can folks not see that leaving Europe after being closely aligned for over 40 years, is going to be anything but straightforward.??
Explain that to me please.?
-
I did. Dont start with the b*llocks that all leave voters are thick, it is not the case.
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
How many who voted leave actually read and acknowledged the leave manifesto and the promises they made.?
It is a very simplistic thing to say that leave meant leave, but it’s far too complex a process as has become apparent since..
It’s like saying we need a striker, we’ve decided we’re going to get one, then we go sign some beer swilling lard arse who barely makes it off the bench in Sunday league - but is technically a striker..
Bad analogy.?
If we as fans can see that signing a striker is not that straightforward, how the hell can folks not see that leaving Europe after being closely aligned for over 40 years, is going to be anything but straightforward.??
Explain that to me please.?
That's harsh on Kwame Thomas. :laugh:
-
But years on how many do you think would change there vote? Very few at a guess looking at other social media and people I speak to as many have said they would vote leave now, no problem
With having a opinion and it might well be right but stop with the people didn’t know what they voted for, they were lied to and everything else, accept that people views vary and they have there own reasons for leaving not just financial in the short/medium term
-
I did. Dont start with the b*llocks that all leave voters are thick, it is not the case.
Naïve is probably the word.
-
But years on how many do you think would change there vote? Very few at a guess looking at other social media and people I speak to as many have said they would vote leave now, no problem
With having a opinion and it might well be right but stop with the people didn’t know what they voted for, they were lied to and everything else, accept that people views vary and they have there own reasons for leaving not just financial in the short/medium term
Ok so people voted knowingly to be poorer.
-
I did. Dont start with the b*llocks that all leave voters are thick, it is not the case.
Naïve is probably the word.
Capable of making a decision. I understand the politics, economics and business impact. I'm not naive enough to say it is all perfect either, but for my own reasons made that choices good and bad.
Given you know nothing of my background you cannot really say anything and we should all respect alternate views, unfortunately some clearly do not.
-
Our old mate Flint was true to form, and backed Johnson.
I think she is the only Labour MP looking for re-election to do so. The other 5 are standing down.
She is getting a schooling on twitter;
https://twitter.com/CarolineFlintMP/status/1185313243159580672
Jesus!
-
Well dont forget those nasty EU-ites "forced" us into all those nasty Zero Hours Contacts !!!
According to HER. Get shut of her. Amazing to think she stood in middle of Donny screaming in support of Corbyn imploring people to vote Remain
If she is my potential MP next Election I will vote for someone else (anybody but her or Tory candidate). I will change my mind IF Labour are running on a revoke Article 50 ticket - otherwise forget it
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
Do you ever have any citations, polling etc to back up what you write bp, where does it come from?
-
Bpool
Your post sums up the problem.
You can't define what "leaving the EU" means.
Norway isn't in the EU. Farage says (now) that Johnson's deal which means a FAR bigger separation from the EU than Norway has, is not really leaving.
You see the point. You CANNOT say you were voting to leave the EU and that's that.
-
some trying to help those who are suffering Flint as their MP
Alex AndreouVerified account @sturdyAlex
I know passions are inflamed and Corbyn is trying to accommodate divergent views, but @CarolineFlintMP went further than mere disagreement in her interventions today. She’s actively promoting a right-wing government and attacking colleagues. She should face disciplinary action.
Iain4Europe #FBPE
I agree! @jeremycorbyn & @UKLabour what action will be taken against Caroline Flint for her actions today?
as steve richards points out
steve richards @steverichards14
Big cheers from right wing Conservatives for intervention of @CarolineFlintMP ..a heroine for those seeking to turbo charge Thatcherism outside the EU.
following her 'contribution' to Brexit
Caroline FlintVerified account @CarolineFlintMP
The Letwin Amendment was a result of the Benn Act not expecting a UK/EU WA Deal back today thereby triggering an extension to 31 Jan. This was a panic measure to reinsert the 3 month delay for one reason only to thwart a deal.The public want an orderly Brexit this doesn’t help.
-
Can ppl please try and stop saying ''respect the referendum'' which was a bad idea, badly executed, corrupt, the ppl were misinformed and uneducated in what it meant and it's implications, it was the biggest pile of dogshit ever.
your words are 1 big reason people will not change there mind, people did no what they were voting for and that was leaving the eu, that is why so few if any have changed there minds
Do you ever have any citations, polling etc to back up what you write bp, where does it come from?
ask anyone speak to people not on a messageboard mate, then be honest and tell me if you can find anyone that has changed there mind, I have a couple as have the other way, when I’ve looked at other clubs message boards on the topic the same result no 1 has changed there mind hardly, remain might win due to people dying and new voters but hopefully we won’t find out
-
Bpool
Your post sums up the problem.
You can't define what "leaving the EU" means.
Norway isn't in the EU. Farage says (now) that Johnson's deal which means a FAR bigger separation from the EU than Norway has, is not really leaving.
You see the point. You CANNOT say you were voting to leave the EU and that's that.
I was personally happy with may deal but they got voted down so for my own reasons I would take this deal so to avoid a no deal, if that happens yes I like many will have got what they voted for
-
But years on how many do you think would change there vote? Very few at a guess looking at other social media and people I speak to as many have said they would vote leave now, no problem
With having a opinion and it might well be right but stop with the people didn’t know what they voted for, they were lied to and everything else, accept that people views vary and they have there own reasons for leaving not just financial in the short/medium term
I know of a brilliant way to find out.
-
BP, So you want Britain to be poorer and the poorer people in Britain to take the brunt of the changes, workers to have less rights, companies and the NHS to suffer staff shortages, Britain to make trade deals with the US where we then have to allow our food standards to drop etc etc, tells us how you personally will be better off?
-
''The governor of the Bank of England has told the BBC that the new Brexit deal struck by the government is "welcome" and a "net economic positive".
Mark Carney said the deal "takes away the tail risk of a disorderly Brexit".''
A net economic positive over the shitfight that brexit has been for the last 3-4 years but what he doesn't say is the bleeding obvious that No Brexit would be even more net economic positive for the UK for now and the forseeable future.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50101866
-
But years on how many do you think would change there vote? Very few at a guess looking at other social media and people I speak to as many have said they would vote leave now, no problem
With having a opinion and it might well be right but stop with the people didn’t know what they voted for, they were lied to and everything else, accept that people views vary and they have there own reasons for leaving not just financial in the short/medium term
I know of a brilliant way to find out.
So do I.
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
We will be able to make our own decisions on immigration who we allow or don’t allow to come to this country to live. That is the biggest positive and i would suspect that is the overriding factor why 52% voted to leave.
We will not be paying billions to the EU every year. That’s a second positive.
We will not be tied to EU legislation on Employment law and various other legislation which we can’t independently control.
We will be able to negotiate our trade deals with who we want as and when we want.
Do you want me to go on any further.
I voted to Remain in 2016 but as time has gone on it has clearly been obvious we are better leaving an EU which has become a giant club which costs a fortune to belong to with so many regulations which restricts our independence on so many issues.
Imo, If we had another referendum now the Leavers would be in the majority still. I think the numbers would be slightly greater in fact. My estimate would be 54% / 46%
This Letwin amendment will solve nothing. All it does is drag this farcical process on & on & on.
How is anyone else going to negotiate a different deal? Please tell me. Why is it a bad deal?
Where is the evidence. Even the Governor of the Bank of England says it’s a good deal.
The only people who say it’s a bad deal are those that want to remain and can’t and won’t accept the will of the people.
And the SNP who have their own agenda of course, and the Liberals who just make it up as they go along. Anything to try and win a few seats.
The people of this country (majority) said leave in a democratic vote.
If we don’t leave the EU democracy is dead and there will be no trust in politicians to carry out the wishes of its people in the future.
That will be a very sad day for the UK.
-
got any proof guvnor?
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
We will be able to make our own decisions on immigration who we allow or don’t allow to come to this country to live. That is the biggest positive and i would suspect that is the overriding factor why 52% voted to leave.
We will not be paying billions to the EU every year. That’s a second positive.
We will not be tied to EU legislation on Employment law and various other legislation which we can’t independently control.
We will be able to negotiate our trade deals with who we want as and when we want.
Do you want me to go on any further.
I voted to Remain in 2016 but as time has gone on it has clearly been obvious we are better leaving an EU which has become a giant club which costs a fortune to belong to with so many regulations which restricts our independence on so many issues.
Imo, If we had another referendum now the Leavers would be in the majority still. I think the numbers would be slightly greater in fact. My estimate would be 54% / 46%
This Letwin amendment will solve nothing. All it does is drag this farcical process on & on & on.
How is anyone else going to negotiate a different deal? Please tell me. Why is it a bad deal?
Where is the evidence. Even the Governor of the Bank of England says it’s a good deal.
The only people who say it’s a bad deal are those that want to remain and can’t and won’t accept the will of the people.
And the SNP who have their own agenda of course, and the Liberals who just make it up as they go along. Anything to try and win a few seats.
The people of this country (majority) said leave in a democratic vote.
If we don’t leave the EU democracy is dead and there will be no trust in politicians to carry out the wishes of its people in the future.
That will be a very sad day for the UK.
No not really, the majority of those who voted chose leave, not the majority of the people.
Apart from the leave means leave mantra, no one - and that means no one either leave or remain - knew what the detail of actually leaving would mean as a deal had not been laid out before the referendum.
Let’s say a family chooses after discussion to take their next holiday overseas.. but they don’t know where, and when it comes to booking, they can’t agree where. Nothing gets booked but they still insist on going to the airport on 31 Oct to board a plane, but still not agreeing which one and probably without any currency or passports..
But hey, going abroad means going abroad..
Again this is a very simplistic analogy but illustrates the point.
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
We will be able to make our own decisions on immigration who we allow or don’t allow to come to this country to live. That is the biggest positive and i would suspect that is the overriding factor why 52% voted to leave.
We will not be paying billions to the EU every year. That’s a second positive.
We will not be tied to EU legislation on Employment law and various other legislation which we can’t independently control.
We will be able to negotiate our trade deals with who we want as and when we want.
Do you want me to go on any further.
I voted to Remain in 2016 but as time has gone on it has clearly been obvious we are better leaving an EU which has become a giant club which costs a fortune to belong to with so many regulations which restricts our independence on so many issues.
Imo, If we had another referendum now the Leavers would be in the majority still. I think the numbers would be slightly greater in fact. My estimate would be 54% / 46%
This Letwin amendment will solve nothing. All it does is drag this farcical process on & on & on.
How is anyone else going to negotiate a different deal? Please tell me. Why is it a bad deal?
Where is the evidence. Even the Governor of the Bank of England says it’s a good deal.
The only people who say it’s a bad deal are those that want to remain and can’t and won’t accept the will of the people.
And the SNP who have their own agenda of course, and the Liberals who just make it up as they go along. Anything to try and win a few seats.
The people of this country (majority) said leave in a democratic vote.
If we don’t leave the EU democracy is dead and there will be no trust in politicians to carry out the wishes of its people in the future.
That will be a very sad day for the UK.
Leaving the Single Market will lose us loads more money than what we stop paying to the EU. And you think that's a positive. Rather sums it up.
-
And I am sure there are plenty of leave voters who chose to vote leave after careful consideration and in the knowledge that it would be a difficult process. But also that plenty didn’t..
-
got any proof guvnor?you can’t have proof if you put any poll up it’s only educated guess how can he prove it, you prove that brexit is not a good idea proper proof?
-
And I am sure there are plenty of leave voters who chose to vote leave after careful consideration and in the knowledge that it would be a difficult process. But also that plenty didn’t..
The information about leave that we have now wasn't in the main available at the time of the vote, much more information has been uncovered about the vote itself, the misinformation about the vote, the illegal funding of advertising about the leave campaign, the fb scandal concerning the vote and mainly the implications of the results of the vote.
Here is a great article about what happened today and what led to it.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2019/oct/19/rebel-amendment-defeat-is-yet-another-painful-bellyflop-for-boris-johnson
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
We will be able to make our own decisions on immigration who we allow or don’t allow to come to this country to live. That is the biggest positive and i would suspect that is the overriding factor why 52% voted to leave.
We will not be paying billions to the EU every year. That’s a second positive.
We will not be tied to EU legislation on Employment law and various other legislation which we can’t independently control.
We will be able to negotiate our trade deals with who we want as and when we want.
Do you want me to go on any further.
I voted to Remain in 2016 but as time has gone on it has clearly been obvious we are better leaving an EU which has become a giant club which costs a fortune to belong to with so many regulations which restricts our independence on so many issues.
Imo, If we had another referendum now the Leavers would be in the majority still. I think the numbers would be slightly greater in fact. My estimate would be 54% / 46%
This Letwin amendment will solve nothing. All it does is drag this farcical process on & on & on.
How is anyone else going to negotiate a different deal? Please tell me. Why is it a bad deal?
Where is the evidence. Even the Governor of the Bank of England says it’s a good deal.
The only people who say it’s a bad deal are those that want to remain and can’t and won’t accept the will of the people.
And the SNP who have their own agenda of course, and the Liberals who just make it up as they go along. Anything to try and win a few seats.
The people of this country (majority) said leave in a democratic vote.
If we don’t leave the EU democracy is dead and there will be no trust in politicians to carry out the wishes of its people in the future.
That will be a very sad day for the UK.
No not really, the majority of those who voted chose leave, not the majority of the people.
Apart from the leave means leave mantra, no one - and that means no one either leave or remain - knew what the detail of actually leaving would mean as a deal had not been laid out before the referendum.
Let’s say a family chooses after discussion to take their next holiday overseas.. but they don’t know where, and when it comes to booking, they can’t agree where. Nothing gets booked but they still insist on going to the airport on 31 Oct to board a plane, but still not agreeing which one and probably without any currency or passports..
But hey, going abroad means going abroad..
Again this is a very simplistic analogy but illustrates the point.
IDM if people didn’t vote then they can’t moan about the outcome. Everyone has the opportunity to vote, if they don’t vote then it’s not relevant is it. Only those that did vote count in the result.
So that’s a majority isn’t it.
When you vote in a General election do you know exactly what that party are going to do over the next 4/5 years. Manifestos are words only, the reality is very often very different.
Do you know we will be better or worse off by voting for that political party.
No you don’t.
No one has a crystal ball do they. Except BB of course, and he doesn’t get it right very often.
-
I did actually say a majority of those who voted.
17.4 million does not represent a majority of the electorate.. Brexit voting should have been compulsory for every one..
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
I take it from all that that you don't know of any positives either.
Know in five years? I knew before the referendum that leaving the Single Market was going to be bloody awful for the economy, but all I got was ignorant people who know nothing insisting that I couldn't possibly know anything about the future either despite going into a lot a technical details explaining why it will be bad for UK business.
We will be able to make our own decisions on immigration who we allow or don’t allow to come to this country to live. That is the biggest positive and i would suspect that is the overriding factor why 52% voted to leave.
We will not be paying billions to the EU every year. That’s a second positive.
We will not be tied to EU legislation on Employment law and various other legislation which we can’t independently control.
We will be able to negotiate our trade deals with who we want as and when we want.
Do you want me to go on any further.
I voted to Remain in 2016 but as time has gone on it has clearly been obvious we are better leaving an EU which has become a giant club which costs a fortune to belong to with so many regulations which restricts our independence on so many issues.
Imo, If we had another referendum now the Leavers would be in the majority still. I think the numbers would be slightly greater in fact. My estimate would be 54% / 46%
This Letwin amendment will solve nothing. All it does is drag this farcical process on & on & on.
How is anyone else going to negotiate a different deal? Please tell me. Why is it a bad deal?
Where is the evidence. Even the Governor of the Bank of England says it’s a good deal.
The only people who say it’s a bad deal are those that want to remain and can’t and won’t accept the will of the people.
And the SNP who have their own agenda of course, and the Liberals who just make it up as they go along. Anything to try and win a few seats.
The people of this country (majority) said leave in a democratic vote.
If we don’t leave the EU democracy is dead and there will be no trust in politicians to carry out the wishes of its people in the future.
That will be a very sad day for the UK.
Leaving the Single Market will lose us loads more money than what we stop paying to the EU. And you think that's a positive. Rather sums it up.
And you know that is a fact do you. You are obviously receiving divine intervention. Know one actually knows what will be the outcome of leaving.
Personally i think, and it is THINK, as i don’t have a direct line to him upstairs, is in the short term it will be a bumpy ride but in the long term probably in 5 years onwards we will be thankful we left the EU.
-
I did actually say a majority of those who voted.
17.4 million does not represent a majority of the electorate.. Brexit voting should have been compulsory for every one..
But it wasn’t and no election or referendum in a free country will ever be.
If it had been compulsory to vote i am pretty sure it would have been over 60% leave vote.
-
That, we will never know..
-
It sounds like Johnson has sent more than 1 letter to the EU, after his setback today.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/19/eu-will-grant-brexit-extension-if-johnson-sends-letter-says-brussels
It seems like he is prepared to risk contempt proceedings in the Scottish Courts.
Being found guilty of contempt carries up to a 2 year custodial sentence.
Be grand that would, and a suitable reward for his actions these past few years.
-
Was it a set back today? There was 20 votes in it, quite a few have said they will vote for the bill today then vote for boris deal, so maybe we will see how long your smugness lasts?
-
I still don't understand why we're doing something there is literally zero positives to.
How do you know, have you a crystal ball. 52% said leave. That’s democracy. We will know in 5 yrs + whether it was good or bad. No one knows.
We had a referendum and we should abide by it END OF. It’s called Democracy.
Right i am of to watch Rovers. :byebye:
In 5 years, how many of the selfish old f**ks that voted for it will be dead?
-
Take it you don’t want to leave then?
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-boris-johnson-plan-2000-worse-off-a9154536.html?amp Is this the truth or bending the truth?
-
No, I look at what will be left for my son, and then his kids. From the very beginning, this has been built on lies. The PM we never elected is one of the biggest liars to never deserve breath the world has ever seen. Yet, people still support him. I honestly cannot get my head around it. Yes politicians twist the truth. This man, who wants the best for the British people, takes lying to the next level. He is a disgusting human being, and if you think he has your best interests at heart, well good luck to you.
Despite all this, it is apparently undemocratic to not leave. Is lying to get votes democratic?
Whatever happens next, politics in this country is going to take a very long time to recover.
-
Even thou he is that bad the great British public according to pretty much every poll would vote him in instead of Jeremy corbyn what does that say about him and the Labour Party?
-
Even thou he is that bad the great British public according to pretty much every poll would vote him in instead of Jeremy corbyn what does that say about him and the Labour Party?
Did I say anywhere that I was a labour voter? That kind of unfounded stupidity is why this is such a f**kup.
-
Anyway, at this late hour, off to order mesen one of those same size Euro coffins
-
Whilst ordering came across this
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-lies-conservative-leader-candidate-list-times-banana-brexit-bus-a8929076.html%3famp
He's the kind of guy that would tell you you had no legs, and you would probably cut yours off just to prove him right
-
Again the question is has he broke he law. If he has that should have consequences, thought even the guy who was successful against him for the prorogation case believes he has not. I dont know the answer.
However, I do believe he has every right to stick to his policy and opinions on it. The way our system works means he will be held accountable so it is his choice to make.
Yesterday's amendment could have been worded differently if it's TRUE intention was simply just a safeguard, I think that's where some of the anger comes from.
But, if the governments intention is to get it all done in 2 weeks, get on with it!
Ironically the best Corbyn could do is tweet "jog on Johnson". That guy cant e even control his front bench on Brexit policy.
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-boris-johnson-plan-2000-worse-off-a9154536.html?amp Is this the truth or bending the truth?
Do you read any links you post, do you look at where the information comes from, reference it with information from another source and make a judgement on how likely it is spin or not?
"But this report shows Boris Johnson is trying to railroad through a Brexit plan that would have a devastating impact on living standards, funding for public services, businesses and jobs or the rest of the United Kingdom too. This report shows income per capita will be £2,000 lower as a result of Boris Johnson's deal. That is £2,000 a year for every man woman and child in the UK, as trade and productivity drops."
Downing Street declined to comment.
-
Was it a set back today? There was 20 votes in it, quite a few have said they will vote for the bill today then vote for boris deal, so maybe we will see how long your smugness lasts?
20 votes in it.?
What were the percentages in this vote.? Similar to leave/remain with Brexit.? And some may be prepared to vote differently.?
Can you see the irony in that.?
-
And who is saying there are quite a few who would vote for the deal.? Was it Johnson himself in his lengthy letter brown nosing the EU leaders not to extend the exit date? A letter he signed, when he didn’t have the courtesy to sign as PM, the letter he was compelled to send under the Benn Act..
I’m no legal expert but isn’t that borderline on contempt.?
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did. I think it's dangerous territory if a. The pm goes against a legal act of parliament and b. Any politician is silenced from their thoughts.
Of course the actual letter from the pm is all about an election not brexit. He has zero control over brexit.
-
If he isn’t prepared to sign a formal letter going out under his office and his position as PM,, then he is acting petulantly and not becoming of someone in his position.
It is ridiculous behaviour and yet again showing his contempt for law and parliament..
He is not fit to be prime minister - that’s not a party political thing, just about him..
-
But the party members voted to put him in that position knowing full well what sort of person he is, everyone knows right around the world.
-
Only a soft Brexit would bring this country together and this government seems to be doing whatever it can to start riots.
-
But the party members voted to put him in that position knowing full well what sort of person he is, everyone knows right around the world.
70 year old white men who have golf club memberships and won't be affected by Brexit voted him in.
-
I did actually say a majority of those who voted.
17.4 million does not represent a majority of the electorate.. Brexit voting should have been compulsory for every one..
But it wasn’t and no election or referendum in a free country will ever be.
If it had been compulsory to vote i am pretty sure it would have been over 60% leave vote.
So Australia's not a free country now, is it?
-
I did actually say a majority of those who voted.
17.4 million does not represent a majority of the electorate.. Brexit voting should have been compulsory for every one..
But it wasn’t and no election or referendum in a free country will ever be.
If it had been compulsory to vote i am pretty sure it would have been over 60% leave vote.
Surely it's younger people who didn't vote and they're more likely to vote remain?
-
https://www.aec.gov.au/FAQs/Voting_Australia.htm
Good idea as well
-
''The governor of the Bank of England has told the BBC that the new Brexit deal struck by the government is "welcome" and a "net economic positive".
Mark Carney said the deal "takes away the tail risk of a disorderly Brexit".''
A net economic positive over the shitfight that brexit has been for the last 3-4 years but what he doesn't say is the bleeding obvious that No Brexit would be even more net economic positive for the UK for now and the forseeable future.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50101866
Sidney, he also closed that interview saying (paraphrasing) 'That was a political answer' with an ironic smile. I took that clearly to mean he has much more to say about it but his position prevents him from doing so.
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did. I think it's dangerous territory if a. The pm goes against a legal act of parliament and b. Any politician is silenced from their thoughts.
Of course the actual letter from the pm is all about an election not brexit. He has zero control over brexit.
If it is the case that the letter requesting extension must come from the prim minister and he's send the letter unsigned then the letter isn't from him. Strong case to argue contempt.
He said in parliament only yesterday that he would not send a letter requesting extension and that it would not break the law for him not to. Foolish position to put himself in. If he were to argue in court that the unsigned letter was indeed sent by him then not to signing it and putting himself at risk of legal action is just stupidity.
-
That snake Gove at it again this morning, saying the risk of No Deal has increased as a result of yesterday's vote and in light of which he is stepping up No Deal planning. Stepping up planning. For f**k's sake they've been threatening No Deal for months with the certainty that it would happen by the end of October if no deal was agreed and have been "Stepping up No Deal planning" as a result.
The contempt this man has for Leave voters is beyond belief when he clearly thinks they will soak up whatever he says about it.
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did. I think it's dangerous territory if a. The pm goes against a legal act of parliament and b. Any politician is silenced from their thoughts.
Of course the actual letter from the pm is all about an election not brexit. He has zero control over brexit.
If it is the case that the letter requesting extension must come from the prim minister and he's send the letter unsigned then the letter isn't from him. Strong case to argue contempt.
He said in parliament only yesterday that he would not send a letter requesting extension and that it would not break the law for him not to. Foolish position to put himself in. If he were to argue in court that the unsigned letter was indeed sent by him then not to signing it and putting himself at risk of legal action is just stupidity.
My knowledge of law is very limited so I couldn't say. I do remember substance over form though, just not sure if that applies here.
As for Gove and stepping up no deal, it is again political but, if one of the 27 were to say no to an extension (unlikely but technically possible) then by default no deal does happen.
-
This parliament will not allow no deal to happen.. if the EU does not agree an extension and the deal does not get approved in time,
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did.
Indeed
https://twitter.com/pandamoanimum/status/1185689444483043329?s=21
-
South Yorkshire complimented for their contribution to yesterday's march
Yorkshire for Europe were out in full force, providing musical accompaniment continuing well after
most of the marchers had passed.
#york4eu #yorkshireforeurope #stopbrexitsavebritain
#peoplesvote @SWYforEurope @yorkshireeurope @Dales4Eu @NYorksEurope
watch and listen
https://twitter.com/i/status/1185878454513946625
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did. I think it's dangerous territory if a. The pm goes against a legal act of parliament and b. Any politician is silenced from their thoughts.
Of course the actual letter from the pm is all about an election not brexit. He has zero control over brexit.
If it is the case that the letter requesting extension must come from the prim minister and he's send the letter unsigned then the letter isn't from him. Strong case to argue contempt.
He said in parliament only yesterday that he would not send a letter requesting extension and that it would not break the law for him not to. Foolish position to put himself in. If he were to argue in court that the unsigned letter was indeed sent by him then not to signing it and putting himself at risk of legal action is just stupidity.
Actually this has been to court already. His lawyers said in court that along with sending the letter he would not do anything to frustrate the intention of the Benn Act.
We shall find out on Monday if not signing the Benn letter and sending a second letter saying don't comply with the Benn letter is 'frustrating the intention of the Benn Act'.
-
The law compelled him to ask for an extension which he did. I think it's dangerous territory if a. The pm goes against a legal act of parliament and b. Any politician is silenced from their thoughts.
Of course the actual letter from the pm is all about an election not brexit. He has zero control over brexit.
If it is the case that the letter requesting extension must come from the prim minister and he's send the letter unsigned then the letter isn't from him. Strong case to argue contempt.
He said in parliament only yesterday that he would not send a letter requesting extension and that it would not break the law for him not to. Foolish position to put himself in. If he were to argue in court that the unsigned letter was indeed sent by him then not to signing it and putting himself at risk of legal action is just stupidity.
My knowledge of law is very limited so I couldn't say. I do remember substance over form though, just not sure if that applies here.
As for Gove and stepping up no deal, it is again political but, if one of the 27 were to say no to an extension (unlikely but technically possible) then by default no deal does happen.
... and starting right THEN the move will be on to get us back in
Quick couple of meetings between interested and cooperative parties who more or less will want the same thing - General Election with them colluding to not split their votes too badly - after standing on "a Vote for us is a Vote to re-enter the EU at the very earliest opportunity" and Bingo
Once they get in power they will continue to work together and couldnt be stopped ... and all perfectly democratic !
-
Even thou he is that bad the great British public according to pretty much every poll would vote him in instead of Jeremy corbyn what does that say about him and the Labour Party?
Exactly.
-
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1185860558718930945?s=19 (https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1185860558718930945?s=19)
-
Even thou he is that bad the great British public according to pretty much every poll would vote him in instead of Jeremy corbyn what does that say about him and the Labour Party?
It's called Stockholm Syndrome x
-
No, I look at what will be left for my son, and then his kids. From the very beginning, this has been built on lies. The PM we never elected is one of the biggest liars to never deserve breath the world has ever seen. Yet, people still support him. I honestly cannot get my head around it. Yes politicians twist the truth. This man, who wants the best for the British people, takes lying to the next level. He is a disgusting human being, and if you think he has your best interests at heart, well good luck to you.
Despite all this, it is apparently undemocratic to not leave. Is lying to get votes democratic?
Whatever happens next, politics in this country is going to take a very long time to recover.
Did you not think lies were told by the remainers. How many lies are they telling us now. Scare mongering that the country is going to collapse if we leave. Load of bo.....ks.
The EU should be a trading agreement between the member countries like the Common market was and not this huge bureaucratic club it is today.
It’s undemocratic to not leave because we had a referendum which had a majority to leave.
Why is so difficult for people to understand that.
-
Accepting the decision to leave is one thing..
Managing the process and making it happen is another thing altogether. That’s not difficult to understand either?
-
Yorkshire voted more against Europe. Another pointless losers march.
One EU leader says no we're out. Parliament arrogantly presuming they'll extend yet if they don't they will have made no deal happen.
If Brexit doesn't get done there'll be more than those losers who marched yesterday
-
No, I look at what will be left for my son, and then his kids. From the very beginning, this has been built on lies. The PM we never elected is one of the biggest liars to never deserve breath the world has ever seen. Yet, people still support him. I honestly cannot get my head around it. Yes politicians twist the truth. This man, who wants the best for the British people, takes lying to the next level. He is a disgusting human being, and if you think he has your best interests at heart, well good luck to you.
Despite all this, it is apparently undemocratic to not leave. Is lying to get votes democratic?
Whatever happens next, politics in this country is going to take a very long time to recover.
Did you not think lies were told by the remainers. How many lies are they telling us now. Scare mongering that the country is going to collapse if we leave. Load of bo.....ks.
The lies and scaremongering have been going on from those that would have us leave for many many years.
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/
More bollox than you could shake a stick at from leave drivers.
The EU should be a trading agreement between the member countries like the Common market was and not this huge bureaucratic club it is today.
Because you say so?
It’s undemocratic to not leave because we had a referendum which had a majority to leave.
Why is so difficult for people to understand that.
All referenda in the UK are advisory only, they do not have to be actioned. It is NOT undemocratic to ignore them if the results of following them look to be bad for the country - which they do, whichever flavour of Brexit you choose!
Why is so difficult for people to understand that!
-
''The governor of the Bank of England has told the BBC that the new Brexit deal struck by the government is "welcome" and a "net economic positive".
Mark Carney said the deal "takes away the tail risk of a disorderly Brexit".''
A net economic positive over the shitfight that brexit has been for the last 3-4 years but what he doesn't say is the bleeding obvious that No Brexit would be even more net economic positive for the UK for now and the forseeable future.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50101866
Sidney, he also closed that interview saying (paraphrasing) 'That was a political answer' with an ironic smile. I took that clearly to mean he has much more to say about it but his position prevents him from doing so.
Thanks Pies, agreed, there wouldn't seem to be any other reason to say that SR
-
Yorkshire voted more against Europe. Another pointless losers march.
One EU leader says no we're out. Parliament arrogantly presuming they'll extend yet if they don't they will have made no deal happen.
If Brexit doesn't get done there'll be more than those losers who marched yesterday
You're so desperate to be poorer.
-
Yorkshire voted more against Europe. Another pointless losers march.
One EU leader says no we're out. Parliament arrogantly presuming they'll extend yet if they don't they will have made no deal happen.
If Brexit doesn't get done there'll be more than those losers who marched yesterday
You're so desperate to be poorer.
I'll be fine financially thanks
-
danger danger, wind up comment
-
Ok.
So here's a big positive about the EU.
I'm traveling to the USA for work. Got a flight at 7 this morning from Heathrow to Newark, then got a connection to Houston, then on to my final destination.
That was the plan. Going to be 18 hours traveling.
Then my first flight was 1 hour late. And went to a different terminal.
Missed my connection.
No worries. I get a rebooking on the next flight to Houston and can still make my final connection.
Except the flight to Houston is now delayed by an hour and I will now not get the final flight of the night to my destination..
That now means I've got to book a hotel for tonight in Houston. And the car hire company at my final destination are saying that if I don't pick up my hire car there by 8am tomorrow (I can't: the first flight tomorrow am doesn't arrive till 10am) they will cancel the booking with zero refund.
So, with the extra hotel room and car hire, I'm £500 out of pocket in addition to arriving 14 hours late.
In addition, I'm now going to have to cancel the first meeting I was supposed to be having on Monday morning.
So naive Billy, used to EU standards, goes to the United Airlines help desk to enquire about compensation. And I get a blank look. The concept doesn't exist in law over here. They've had well over a grand off me for the tickets, f**ked up my travel, cost me an extra £500, lost me a meeting and they just say "have a nice day sir".
You REALLY want us to align with the USA and not the EU? This is what in means in practice. Everything stacked for big companies and against people.
-
Going down the US route looks awful, sounds awful and is awful, professional service staff having to produce apple pie smiles and gushing service to get the tips to feed their families!!!!
-
''The government has changed the wording of its Get Ready for Brexit campaign appearing to suggest a no-deal exit on the 31 October is now less likely.
Its website now says: "We could still leave with no deal on 31 October."''
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50117797?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk&link_location=live-reporting-story
I think if you got the bus fare home from this mob after trading in your bentley you'd be doing well.
-
That's the same day Michael Gove was on the telly saying no-deal is more likely!!!!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/20/gove-triggers-no-deal-brexit-contingency-plans-operation-yellowhammer
If there is a bus running anywhere with this lot in charge we will all be doing well.
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
-
Excerpt from article by Timothy Ash.
''Since this government is dominated by hard Brexiteers – and what is envisaged in the new deal is a hard Brexit for England, Wales and Scotland, with a softer one only for Northern Ireland – no leave voter could plausibly complain they were only being offered the choice between a flaccid Brino (Brexit in Name Only) and staying in the EU. Hundreds of thousands rallied outside parliament on Saturday to show their support for such a people’s vote. Even more important than the activists are the opinion polls that now persistently show a majority for remain. How absurd it would be if the UK was to leave the EU, in the name of respecting “the will of the people”, at precisely the moment when the will of the people had changed''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/20/europe-fed-up-brexit-best-stay-in-macron-extension
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
He doesn't want to force his opinion (or lack of opinion!) on others, though! :lol:
-
Good to see some of Yorkshire's finest are on the case
S & W Yorkshire for Europe
🇪🇺 @SWYforEurope
This is HUGE.
It explains why these 'rebel' Labour MPs are supporting Johnson's hard Brexit. They're all members of the right-wing pro-Brexit think tank Prosperity UK. And look who else is! What are their motivations.
Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint and Simon Kinnock in the same club as the most ardent brexiters, the ERG and the DUP
https://www.prosperity-uk.com/aacabout/
-
Unbelievable, well not but it's hard to take, a fifth column.
-
Check this out:
A privately owned hedge fund "the alternative arrangement commission"
non-governmental ltd company?
It's a industry lobby group.
Not a "commission.
Check the list of members ~ esp @ukLabour ones
https://www.prosperity-uk.com/aacabout/
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
yes donny debate is good, certain people put links up and if it is from a labour supporting paper as normally is then that is acceptable if it’s not from a labour side it’s rubbished and not worth the paper it’s written on, that is every time by every poster
-
Well my posts on this matter are not part political and are based on a common sense interpretation of what I observe.
I see a PM trying to deflect around the law, around parliamentary process, and acting petulantly.
-
Good to see some of Yorkshire's finest are on the case
S & W Yorkshire for Europe
🇪🇺 @SWYforEurope
This is HUGE.
It explains why these 'rebel' Labour MPs are supporting Johnson's hard Brexit. They're all members of the right-wing pro-Brexit think tank Prosperity UK. And look who else is! What are their motivations.
Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint and Simon Kinnock in the same club as the most ardent brexiters, the ERG and the DUP
https://www.prosperity-uk.com/aacabout/
Flint and Kinnock only joined recently though. Both were very strong remain backers in the referendum.
https://twitter.com/carolineflintmp/status/1171763188687417344?lang=en
-
Good to see some of Yorkshire's finest are on the case
S & W Yorkshire for Europe
🇪🇺 @SWYforEurope
This is HUGE.
It explains why these 'rebel' Labour MPs are supporting Johnson's hard Brexit. They're all members of the right-wing pro-Brexit think tank Prosperity UK. And look who else is! What are their motivations.
Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint and Simon Kinnock in the same club as the most ardent brexiters, the ERG and the DUP
https://www.prosperity-uk.com/aacabout/
FB; Donny, Barnsley, and Rotherham all voted around 69% to leave. What are you failing to understand about that?
-
Good to see some of Yorkshire's finest are on the case
S & W Yorkshire for Europe
🇪🇺 @SWYforEurope
This is HUGE.
It explains why these 'rebel' Labour MPs are supporting Johnson's hard Brexit. They're all members of the right-wing pro-Brexit think tank Prosperity UK. And look who else is! What are their motivations.
Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint and Simon Kinnock in the same club as the most ardent brexiters, the ERG and the DUP
https://www.prosperity-uk.com/aacabout/
FB; Donny, Barnsley, and Rotherham all voted around 69% to leave. What are you failing to understand about that?
SS, what you seem to fail to understand is that lots of folk in Donny, Barnsley and Rotherham believed the lies that were fed to them by the leave campaign. Have you stopped to wonder why all the leavers in the government have stopped mentioning all those false promises? No? Didn't think so.
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
yes donny debate is good, certain people put links up and if it is from a labour supporting paper as normally is then that is acceptable if it’s not from a labour side it’s rubbished and not worth the paper it’s written on, that is every time by every poster
Such as? Have you got an example of something posted that's been rubbished?
-
Obviously no good news on the brexit economic horizon with this deal.
''Sajid Javid refuses to assess economic dangers of Brexit plan
Chancellor accused of believing ‘evidence is superfluous to good policy making’''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/21/sajid-javid-refuses-to-assess-economic-dangers-of-brexit-plan
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
yes donny debate is good, certain people put links up and if it is from a labour supporting paper as normally is then that is acceptable if it’s not from a labour side it’s rubbished and not worth the paper it’s written on, that is every time by every poster
Bpool.
It's not about which side of politics a source is on. It's about which side of the truth they are on.
I could list you half a dozen left wing websites that I wouldn't trust to tell me the time. But on newspapers, the (slightly) left leaning ones don't have track records of deliberately deceiving readers. (Or at least they put it right if they do make an wrong claim.) By contrast, the Sun, Express and Mail have been churning out lies and half truths for decades.
I know what that is like. The Mail once wrote an article about some work I was involved in. They deliberately and carefully removed the sections from our press release which said that the work was partly funded by the EU and involved a consortium of 11 partners from 7 different EU countries. They made their readers believe the EU had nothing to do with it, and it was only Brits involved.
If they deliberately did that over something so insignificant, I wouldn't ever trust them to be honest on anything.
-
69 % of the turnout in Doncaster, Barnsley and Ritherham.
putting aside the referdum was corrupt
and only advisory.
still not ONE of them can even give ONE verifiable example of how they will be better off by us
leaving the EU.
So did they all deliberately vote to be worse off?
(we already are, by the way ).
NO , of course not
They voted for a collection of LIES
which have all been discredited
( straight bananas FFS ! )
the only brexit arguement left now is 17.5 million,
will of the people,.etc
we know just from the demographics that there are not 17 4 million left,
and additionally there are 2 million young people eligible to vote who dont read the S*n , Mail.
When we vote again , it will , for the best for Doncaster, best for Barnsley, best for Ritherham.
Staying in the EU
-
wow this thread is just a labour remain propaganda thread I might talk a load of shite but some of you want to read this thread back lol, forget what the tories post on fb it’s post after post Replying to your own posts, have a opinion but please stop trying force it on others, no 1 posts on this thread apart from 10 people as your like a pack of hounds
What? Do you know the point in a forum is for debate? We keep asking you the pros of leaving and you give us nothing back and we can list pros of remaining that's probably why it looks like propaganda.
yes donny debate is good, certain people put links up and if it is from a labour supporting paper as normally is then that is acceptable if it’s not from a labour side it’s rubbished and not worth the paper it’s written on, that is every time by every poster
Bpool.
It's not about which side of politics a source is on. It's about which side of the truth they are on.
I could list you half a dozen left wing websites that I wouldn't trust to tell me the time. But on newspapers, the (slightly) left leaning ones don't have track records of deliberately deceiving readers. (Or at least they put it right if they do make an wrong claim.) By contrast, the Sun, Express and Mail have been churning out lies and half truths for decades.
I know what that is like. The Mail once wrote an article about some work I was involved in. They deliberately and carefully removed the sections from our press release which said that the work was partly funded by the EU and involved a consortium of 11 partners from 7 different EU countries. They made their readers believe the EU had nothing to do with it, and it was only Brits involved.
If they deliberately did that over something so insignificant, I wouldn't ever trust them to be honest on anything.
I would agree with you on the press bst.
In my previous two companies the press narration from those of all political persuasions was at best misleading. We have a real problem with the lack of a truthful press in society worldwide.
The problem is they all have to sell something so they will do that.....
-
BP, I've said a few times on this forum all you have to do is tell us why leaving is better than staying, for any reason/s singular or combined that make the case. Those that want No brexit are always quoting economists and experts in their field that tell us we'll be worse off, so back up your argument for leaving with some facts and you'll be the first.
If your case is stong enough maybe you'll persuade some of us we got it wrong because remainers love facts.
-
The year is 2192. The British Prime Minister visits Brussels to ask for an extension to the Brexit deadline. No one remembers where this tradition originated, but every year it attracts many tourists from all over the world.
-
funny
-
The year is 2192. The British Prime Minister visits Brussels to ask for an extension to the Brexit deadline. No one remembers where this tradition originated, but every year it attracts many tourists from all over the world.
When the British PM carries out the tradition, he arrives in Brussels he arrives sucking a dummy and cuddling a teddy bear
-
Has Johnson infected the whole far right with Liars disease? can none of them tell the truth?
''Labour is likely to seize on comments by Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, in making its argument for a UK-wide customs union, after he was forced to admit the current deal would require businesses to complete export declarations for goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK.
Barclay originally told a Lords EU committee that it would not be necessary for businesses to make declarations. But five minutes later, he had to admit: “Exit summary declarations will be required in terms of NI to GB.”''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/21/tory-mps-reluctant-to-attach-customs-union-to-brexit-bill
-
Presented without comment.
https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1186650398037331968
-
Has Johnson infected the whole far right with Liars disease? can none of them tell the truth?
''Labour is likely to seize on comments by Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, in making its argument for a UK-wide customs union, after he was forced to admit the current deal would require businesses to complete export declarations for goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK.
Barclay originally told a Lords EU committee that it would not be necessary for businesses to make declarations. But five minutes later, he had to admit: “Exit summary declarations will be required in terms of NI to GB.”''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/21/tory-mps-reluctant-to-attach-customs-union-to-brexit-bill
Sydney, I don’t usually bother posting on this thread but the first line in your above post has drawn me in mate.
You sound surprised that politicians don’t often tell the truth.
-
So where the f**k are we now.?
-
So where the f**k are we now.?
Searching for a suitable ditch for the PM
-
A lot on the news thought he would try get a 2 week extension and do the vote during that time
-
for his nose or his knob?
-
Has Johnson infected the whole far right with Liars disease? can none of them tell the truth?
''Labour is likely to seize on comments by Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, in making its argument for a UK-wide customs union, after he was forced to admit the current deal would require businesses to complete export declarations for goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK.
Barclay originally told a Lords EU committee that it would not be necessary for businesses to make declarations. But five minutes later, he had to admit: “Exit summary declarations will be required in terms of NI to GB.”''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/21/tory-mps-reluctant-to-attach-customs-union-to-brexit-bill
Sydney, I don’t usually bother posting on this thread but the first line in your above post has drawn me in mate.
You sound surprised that politicians don’t often tell the truth.
The tories have turned it into an art-form they're in a class of their own at present, no one will believe this when it is over and written up. If brexit goes ahead that'll be around 10 years.
-
List of the 19 Labour MP's who put their jobs before the welfare and jobs of their constituents or the country.
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1186729878588186624
-
List of the 19 Labour MP's who put their jobs before the welfare and jobs of their constituents or the country.
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1186729878588186624
Here's one on that list showing how diligently he was doing his job in coming to the decision to back Johnson's Brexit.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1186606116567953408
-
How anyone can be in a position to hold a view on something that they have not read is a mystery to us all.
That said, the presentation of information is subject to the dark arts.
There is an interesting article by Peter Oborne on the media manipulation at the heart of the government operation;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/
It becomes difficult to know how an issue is being presented until you know what has been left out.
The Trump method is the new normal for the UK media.
-
bp please read this link supplied by Albie and give us your informed comment.
-
And for those of you who don't know, Peter Oborne is a journalist with views from the far right of British politics.
But, unlike most of the rats who are devouring the far right, his first allegiance is to truth and fairness. I have a huge amount of respect for him, even if I disagree vehemently with his political ideas. He's on the right side on the biggest issue of the age. Whether you value truth even if you lose, or whether you're happy to ditch it if it helps you win.
-
How anyone can be in a position to hold a view on something that they have not read is a mystery to us all.
That said, the presentation of information is subject to the dark arts.
There is an interesting article by Peter Oborne on the media manipulation at the heart of the government operation;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/
It becomes difficult to know how an issue is being presented until you know what has been left out.
The Trump method is the new normal for the UK media.
Live on BBC radio 2 now.
-
just keep asking the question Sydney , give one ,
( that's right just f@cking ONE ) example of how I will be better off by leaving the EU .
that always shuts them up.
fortunately, slowly, they are bringing themselves to admit , they were conned, and wrong.
-
foxbat, I think the rate of decline from mortality will outstrip their ability to change their minds.
-
fortunately, slowly, they are bringing themselves to admit , they were conned, and wrong.
... but fortunately they have the Govt and other MPs from other Party to eventually bulldoze through what they wanted (even if they dont want it now) under the guise of "giving them what they want"
-
They've probably got more time than responding to the petty insults for having a different opinion.....
-
Looks like President Cummings is lining up the Facebook dominoes before any GE;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/23/tories-hire-facebook-propaganda-pair-to-run-online-election-campaign
Its like deja vu, all over again!
-
How anyone can be in a position to hold a view on something that they have not read is a mystery to us all.
That said, the presentation of information is subject to the dark arts.
There is an interesting article by Peter Oborne on the media manipulation at the heart of the government operation;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/
It becomes difficult to know how an issue is being presented until you know what has been left out.
The Trump method is the new normal for the UK media.
Apologies Albie, just posted this on the Johnson thread before I read this one. The interview on Channel 4 news is worth a couple of minutes of people's time btw
-
I see Swinson has 3,5 million reasons to stay in the EU. but forgot.
-
They've probably got more time than responding to the petty insults for having a different opinion.....
I don't mind people having different opinions byfp it's different ''facts'' that are the problem.
-
And for those of you who don't know, Peter Oborne is a journalist with views from the far right of British politics.
But, unlike most of the rats who are devouring the far right, his first allegiance is to truth and fairness. I have a huge amount of respect for him, even if I disagree vehemently with his political ideas. He's on the right side on the biggest issue of the age. Whether you value truth even if you lose, or whether you're happy to ditch it if it helps you win.
could it be possible he is trying his very best to sell his book?
-
And for those of you who don't know, Peter Oborne is a journalist with views from the far right of British politics.
But, unlike most of the rats who are devouring the far right, his first allegiance is to truth and fairness. I have a huge amount of respect for him, even if I disagree vehemently with his political ideas. He's on the right side on the biggest issue of the age. Whether you value truth even if you lose, or whether you're happy to ditch it if it helps you win.
could it be possible he is trying his very best to sell his book?
Which one - The History of Pakistani Cricket?
-
Looks like President Cummings is lining up the Facebook dominoes before any GE;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/23/tories-hire-facebook-propaganda-pair-to-run-online-election-campaign
Its like deja vu, all over again!
Seems daft to tie the Brexit vote into a general election. The Tories would probably win even if Brexit wasn't going on, so to tie in their probable win to "the will of the people" is ridiculous. A general election will never be the right way to decide Brexit.
-
And for those of you who don't know, Peter Oborne is a journalist with views from the far right of British politics.
But, unlike most of the rats who are devouring the far right, his first allegiance is to truth and fairness. I have a huge amount of respect for him, even if I disagree vehemently with his political ideas. He's on the right side on the biggest issue of the age. Whether you value truth even if you lose, or whether you're happy to ditch it if it helps you win.
could it be possible he is trying his very best to sell his book?
Which one - The History of Pakistani Cricket?
yes
-
BIG BIG chance to call Johnsons bluff
He offers more time for MPs to discuss his "exceptional deal" providing they agree to General Election on Dec 12th. He has already said Labour are frightened to call an Election
Labour Lib Dems Green and SNP should counter with - we dont need an Election - we will go through your deal in that same time period then IF we agree and pass it as it is "exceptioanlly good" we would do with the proviso that there is then a confirmatory vote as follows
a) we agree with the Deal as negotiated by Johnson and wish to Leave the EU or
b) we wish to Remain in the EU
We could then see who else is frightened BUT he will never go for it. I will Tweet him if he has any wifi in that ditch
-
Everything suggests though that woildnt get through parliament.
Of course they all want an election, except they dont as they think they'll lose.
-
Labours best chance of winning an election would be to dress Corbyn up as Santa, and hope people make a mistake and put the vote slip in his sack.
-
Why did Johnson announce he was calling for an election today. After passing both his Queen's Speech and the 2nd reading of the WB?
Maybe he saw this:
if "the deadline for the UK to leave the EU has been extended beyond the 31st of October 2019":
LAB: 27%
CON: 26%
BREX: 20%
LDEM: 18%
GRN: 4%
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1187399919604289538
-
BIG BIG chance to call Johnsons bluff
He offers more time for MPs to discuss his "exceptional deal" providing they agree to General Election on Dec 12th. He has already said Labour are frightened to call an Election
Labour Lib Dems Green and SNP should counter with - we dont need an Election - we will go through your deal in that same time period then IF we agree and pass it as it is "exceptioanlly good" we would do with the proviso that there is then a confirmatory vote as follows
a) we agree with the Deal as negotiated by Johnson and wish to Leave the EU or
b) we wish to Remain in the EU
We could then see who else is frightened BUT he will never go for it. I will Tweet him if he has any wifi in that ditch
but everyone knows Corbyn is desperate for a election there is no bluff to call, let’s just have the brexit vote hopefully get it through then have a election
-
Why did Johnson announce he was calling for an election today. After passing both his Queen's Speech and the 2nd reading of the WB?
Maybe he saw this:
if "the deadline for the UK to leave the EU has been extended beyond the 31st of October 2019":
LAB: 27%
CON: 26%
BREX: 20%
LDEM: 18%
GRN: 4%
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1187399919604289538
Surely that would just encourage Parliament to vote down his deal and then still have the election on Dec 12?
-
No glyn, as the angle hes going for is that hes tried yet the rest have held him up. To be fair it likely would work.
It's also a leading question....
-
''Most voters think risk of violence against MPs is 'price worth paying' over Brexit
Research finds majority of both leave and remain voters feel violence acceptable to get outcome they support''
No doubt taking their lead from our PM whom we know is not against the odd bit himself, tory members and voters really have set a new standard in UK politics.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/24/majority-of-voters-think-violence-against-mps-is-price-worth-paying-for-brexit
-
Why did Johnson announce he was calling for an election today. After passing both his Queen's Speech and the 2nd reading of the WB?
Maybe he saw this:
if "the deadline for the UK to leave the EU has been extended beyond the 31st of October 2019":
LAB: 27%
CON: 26%
BREX: 20%
LDEM: 18%
GRN: 4%
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1187399919604289538
Surely that would just encourage Parliament to vote down his deal and then still have the election on Dec 12?
Given the output from the EU Ambassadors' meeting today it seems that this option may be off the table.
The French appear to want a short extension, perhaps to 15th or 30th November. The fact that the decision couldn't be confirmed today suggests discussions within the EU will go on over the weekend.
If the French (and maybe others) relent and the Commission's preferred extension date of 31st January is agreed, then I suspect we'll have a General Election on 12th December in the hope of breaking the log-jam. Some discussion on the WAB will probably take place, but it's unlikely to be completed before Parliament is dissolved.
If the EU goes for the short extension, then the Election is off and the ball is in Parliament's court, as there is almost an unspoken threat that a further extension request may not be granted.
-
This. Just, appalling.
What the f**k is Brexit doing to us?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/poll-violence-against-mps-price-worth-paying-to-get-brexit-result/amp/
-
Shouldn't that be what the f**k is no Brexit doing to us?
It's not the fault of Brexit, we haven't left yet. It's the fault of those who refuse to accept the referendum result.
-
BB
Brexit isn't a thing that happens on one day at a specific time.
It's a process. It'll be a 20 year transition. And the process of getting to where we are now had been frighteningly toxic, with the right wing press in particular stirring up hatred by presenting MPs and judges Dou g their constitutional jobs as being enemies of the people (their PRECISE words) and egging on Leave voters to believe that there is some sort of conspiracy against them.
Your posts are a perfect example of who successful that rabble rousing has been. You have no interest in engaging in grown up discussion. You accuse anyone and everyone on the other side of engaging in deceit and bad faith.
It HAS to stop. It's not a f**king game. This is how nations lose their way.
-
BST. If it was up to you it wouldn't take 20 years to sort out, it wouldn't happen. You'd want it stopped and have us remain in the EU, despite the result of the referendum.
You think you are right to demand that. I think you are wrong to demand that.
-
There you go again.
Completely ignoring the countless times I've said I would accept a Norway-type Brexit deal.
What's your problem? Determined to set up straw men to continue an argument that is unnecessary?
-
So if it's not going to be a Norway-type Brexit you won't accept it.
What the f**k is no Brexit going to do to us now?
-
Brexit all it means at minute is a fat bird from Barnsley sat on mi fence and breks it
-
The quicker we are out the better
-
So if it's not going to be a Norway-type Brexit you won't accept it.
What the f**k is no Brexit going to do to us now?
I'm not going to.meekly accept a Brexit that wasn't ever on the agenda in 2016, no. I'm not going to meekly accept a Brexit that's been hijacked by a group of rabid right wing politicians for THEIR ends, no.
If you reckon that's what the public now want,put it to a vote and find out. If that vote went against me, I'd accept it. As I've been saying for 2 years.
-
Thing is BST, I don't believe you anymore.
-
With zero reason for that BB, other than your own prejudice.
You need to take a long, hard look at yourself.
-
You say you would accept the result of a new referendum bst and yes I think you would but the majority would not you could have 10 of them and most would not accept the result so is there any point?
-
Bpool.
There was a poll earlier this year.
4 options
Remain
Norway Deal
May Deal.
No Deal.
People were asked to rank them in order of preference.
No option got a majority of first preferences.
When you counted 1 and second preferences, 75% said they'd go for a Norway deal.
And THERE is the problem. That's been rejected because it's not acceptable to the ERG and Farage.
There IS a democratic outrage going on. And it's the fact that a Hard Brexit that was never, EVER on the agenda in 2016 is being rammed through by far right politicians.
If people really wanted an outcome that would be most acceptable to most people, it would be a Norway type deal.
-
Every person I know that voted remain which is quite a few, all of them say they will never accept a leave vote, maybe it’s just people I know!
-
Precisely.
You've got to stop judging the entire country by the tiny (by comparison) set of interactions you have.
-
Yes Blackpool, get in the real world. Ignore your personal experience, it's not true. Everyone around you is lying. Read the Guardian instead.
-
Yes bp hang in with the little Britain brigade and think small.
-
F*cking hell fire.
-
Yes bp hang in with the little Britain brigade and think small.
Don't do it BP, stick with us on the side of democracy.
-
That's right bp you stick with johnson, cummings and bullet.
-
That's right bp you stick with johnson, cummings and bullet.
Stick with the NHS being sold off and loss of workers rights.
-
Yes bp hang in with the little Britain brigade and think small.
Don't do it BP, stick with us on the side of democracy.
I've explained democracy to you once before BB, and you still don't understand it!
-
What's wrong with Bentley West End?
-
What's wrong with Bentley West End?
It’s in Bentley 😀
-
SS.
Now YOU are building up straw men. What IS it with you folk that you have to invent an enemy to fight against?
I didn't say that tin baths and outside shit houses were the rule in the 60s. I said they existed. And they were widely accepted. As were institutionalised racism. Homophobia. Drink driving. Shocking levels of infant mortality and adult life expectancy. A moribund economy.
I'm saying you have an odd outlook if you think 60s society is one we should idolise.
In fact, worse than idolise. What YOU want to do is to impose it on a younger generation that despises it.
-
BST, you've used the strawman tactic against me in this whole Brexit debate.
I've said all along that we should respect a democratic vote and carry it out. You have constantly rejected my point and countered it by questioning why I believe we will be better of financially by leaving the EU!
In reality, I never said we would. I've HOPED we would, and still do. I've presented positive opinions about life following Brexit because I believe in looking forward with a positive attitude, as in my opinion to go against the vote would be more disastrous than any struggles we might face following Brexit.
-
Back to the deal, and some doubted whether the plan was to weaken workers rights and environmental safeguards.
Here is the FT story (FT website is behind a paywall);
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHyH_QYWsAAuq1d.jpg
Looks like posh boy Johnson speaks with forked tongue!
-
SS.
Now YOU are building up straw men. What IS it with you folk that you have to invent an enemy to fight against?
I didn't say that tin baths and outside shit houses were the rule in the 60s. I said they existed. And they were widely accepted. As were institutionalised racism. Homophobia. Drink driving. Shocking levels of infant mortality and adult life expectancy. A moribund economy.
I'm saying you have an odd outlook if you think 60s society is one we should idolise.
In fact, worse than idolise. What YOU want to do is to impose it on a younger generation that despises it.
Firstly, you're in the wrong thread. Also, if you think my outlook is odd, you seriously need to start watching some documentaries about the 60s on BBC2, and the history channel, because your knowledge of social history really is shocking.
As regards the younger generation despising the 1960s, I don't know any that do, and why would they? Who wouldn't swap unemployment for full employment, streets full of drugs, violence, guns and knives for streets that were so safe that young kids went to school and back on their own?
The only generation that despises the 1960s is yours.
-
BB
You claim you want us to get behind Brexit and unite to move the country on. Yet when I tell you the Brexit that I would accept, you call me a liar.
Odd contradiction. Almost like you WANT the other side to be a demon that you can define yourself against.
-
.......And there you go again!
-
What? Pointing out facts?
-
What facts? The fact that I called you a liar? When?
-
You said you didn't believe what I said. Therefore, you were saying that in your opinion I was lying.
Pretty simple logic.
-
What a load of b*llocks! I thought Rovers were in for a resounding victory today, so because they didn't play does that mean I'm a liar?
-
No, just shit at logic.
-
That's a really shite analogy BB.
It wasn't about a hope of something that was going to happen.
I gave you my opinion. You said you didn't believe that was my actual opinion. Therefore you were accusing me of deliberately saying something that wasn't true AKA lying.
-
BST just because I believe your opinion is a shite one doesn't make you a liar, it just means I think you are wrong.
Just because you said in one breath that you would respect the result of another referendum even if resulted in leave, and that would be the end of it, and in the next breath said you would only accept a Norway style deal, to me, suggests that you're more confused than lying. Now, if you were to refute that now, would suggest that I'm wrong and you might be a liar.
-
I didn't ever say that I would only accept a Norway deal.
I said I wouldn't accept the very hard Brexit that we are careering towards as being the genuine democratic choice in 2016. Because it wasn't.
I've made this very clear on numerous occasions, but since you are still struggling, I'll spell it out. Again.
My opinion is that a Norway deal would have been a compromise that could have achieved broad acceptance in 2017. I don't think it would have been good, but it would probably have been the least bad outcome, given the shit tip we'd pitched up on.
That option was taken away once Brexit became the preserve of only the Right wing of our politics. They rejected that option outright,saying it wouldn't be Brexit. (Why they didn't say that BEFORE the vote, I'll leave for you to figure out).
Where we currently are is that the far Right of our politicians have insisted that the 2016 vote be interpreted, by them,as meaning a far harder exit than anything that was ever seriously discussed in 2016.
I don't accept that as being a fair democratic decision. Given that the Norway deal isn't available, I want a referendum between Johnson's deal and Remain.
If the country votes for Johnson's deal, I will accept that. Because people will have expressed a preference for a specific leave deal.
How you infer confusion from that, or a lack of respect for democracy is beyond me.
Doubtless this will now spiral into the usual quagmire of obfuscation and unsupported assertion.
-
I'm gonna start calling you Worzel. You've ranted on, completely ignoring my post (5072), and typically in strawman fashion completely veered off from the point.
-
BB
We've been through the points you raise in that post as naseum over the years.
They issue is that there isn't a credible economist anywhere who thinks we'll be better off after leaving. Your hope is meaningless in that context. I fully accept that you hope we'll be fine, but in issues as serious as this, hope isn't much help. I don't mean that as an insult. I'm just genuinely bemused as to what other existential decision folk would trust to hope, when there's a welter of credible expert opinion pointing in the opposite direction.
But as I predicted, you've gone off on a different tack after accusing me of lying and being confused.
-
Worzel, you're unbelievable. I'll give you one more chance to get your head around post 5072.
-
It says a lot about someone's mindset when the most important thing they have in mind is what names to call other people.
-
BST, you've used the strawman tactic against me in this whole Brexit debate.
I've said all along that we should respect a democratic vote and carry it out. You have constantly rejected my point and countered it by questioning why I believe we will be better of financially by leaving the EU!
In reality, I never said we would. I've HOPED we would, and still do. I've presented positive opinions about life following Brexit because I believe in looking forward with a positive attitude, as in my opinion to go against the vote would be more disastrous than any struggles we might face following Brexit.
The major problem with that - as has been said dozens of times - is defining what IT is. As you didn't vote to leave then how do you know your version of Brexit is the same as selby, bkpool, steve and the others who did?
Johnson, Gove, Rabb, Cummings & the ERG now say this deal is their version of Brexit. The DUP & Farage say it isn't Brexit. Less than 20% of the public think it is a good deal.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-boris-johnson-delay-article-50-opinion-poll-a9172051.html
So who here is not respecting the result of the referendum? Johnson and his merry band - or Farage, the DUP & the public?
-
They are all respecting the result of the referendum because they insist we must leave, by whatever means. People who want to remain are not respecting the result of the referendum.
-
They are all respecting the result of the referendum because they insist we must leave, by whatever means. People who want to remain are not respecting the result of the referendum.
"Whatever means" wasn't on the what was sent out. They said they'd get the best possible deal. What's wrong with holding that to account, not wanting to crash out (which wasn't part of the ref)?
-
They are all respecting the result of the referendum because they insist we must leave, by whatever means. People who want to remain are not respecting the result of the referendum.
"Whatever means" wasn't on the what was sent out. They said they'd get the best possible deal. What's wrong with holding that to account, not wanting to crash out (which wasn't part of the ref)?
'By whatever means' would also cover the UK declaring war on the EU but no doubt that would be deemed to be respecting the referendum too.
-
I think we've finally got to the core of the problem.
-
They are all respecting the result of the referendum because they insist we must leave, by whatever means. People who want to remain are not respecting the result of the referendum.
"Whatever means" wasn't on the what was sent out. They said they'd get the best possible deal. What's wrong with holding that to account, not wanting to crash out (which wasn't part of the ref)?
No Answer was the stern reply. :)
-
Nobody dares mention their main reason for voting leave as they'd be accused of being a racist.
I don't want open borders. There I said it.
It will probably now be easier for the skilled Indian Doctor or Japanese scientist to get in now rather than taking preference over EU citizens.
-
Nobody dares mention their main reason for voting leave as they'd be accused of being a racist.
I don't want open borders. There I said it.
It will probably now be easier for the skilled Indian Doctor or Japanese scientist to get in now rather than taking preference over EU citizens.
Aye and nurses, because they'll get through that £30K immigration threshold.
-
Hence why a value cap is the wrong way to go. A skills cap works far, far better.
I disagree on that being everyone's reason for voting leave, it isnt. But for some yes it was and it remains an issue.
Was talking with friends on this a few weeks back and the question posed really is how do you define which internationals offer more than others before they get here? It's difficult.
Also interesting that Dianne Abbott was saying this morning about making it easier for people to come here. I'm not sure how you do that given how complicated an issue it is.
-
I agree a skills based points system that changes with the needs of the country which what is used in Australia, there is also a business migration scheme where a certain amount of money is required to be invested along with the employment of X munber of people which needs strong oversight.
A family reunion migration system runs along side this as well as our notorious refugee policy. Our minister for torture has too much power over visas and has been caught out a few time doing favours for mates.
-
Curry with right wing politics night every of the week not just Thursdays!
JD Wetherspoon has been accused of breaching the Companies Act after failing to seek shareholder approval for spending on almost 2m pro-leave beer mats before the 2016 EU referendum.
The pub chain spent £94,856 during the referendum campaign, comprising £18,000 on 1.5m “Brexit beer mats”, £8,400 on a further 200,000 mats, and £68,186 on another 200,000 mats, 5,000 posters and 500,000 booklets, Electoral Commission records show.
Legal experts said shareholder approval was necessary because the spending constituted political expenditure under the 2006 legislation.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/27/jd-wetherspoon-may-have-breached-law-over-19m-brexit-beer-mats
just for you bp
-
This evening the government has halted it's no deal preparations.
To date it has spent around £2 billion (that is £30 per person) of your money on something that is not going to happen.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall
-
Can someone with a better understanding explain what the ramifications of the EU saying they will not renegotiate the WA, does this mean that if parliament is unhappy with aspects of it they have to accept them or reject it holus-bolus?
Can parliament debate the WA without the cooperation of the tories?
-
This evening the government has halted it's no deal preparations.
To date it has spent around £2 billion (that is £30 per person) of your money on something that is not going to happen.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall
if people had voted mays deal it would have been a lot less shame on them mps
-
Can someone with a better understanding explain what the ramifications of the EU saying they will not renegotiate the WA, does this mean that if parliament is unhappy with aspects of it they have to accept them or reject it holus-bolus?
Can parliament debate the WA without the cooperation of the tories?
No, the government sets the agenda on the debate. If they do not push it forward it wont be debated.
The deal is two way isn't it? If the eu say no its deal or no deal with either leave or remain.
Of course I wouldnt believe the eu wont change their view if government changes.
-
Thanks bfyp
-
Here you go brexiters your propaganda awaits
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/oct/30/jingle-polls-how-the-papers-covered-johnsons-december-election
Murdoch & Co will get Brexit done!
-
Here you go brexiters your propaganda awaits
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/oct/30/jingle-polls-how-the-papers-covered-johnsons-december-election
Murdoch & Co will get Brexit done!
thank you I like the guardian
-
Here you go brexiters your propaganda awaits
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/oct/30/jingle-polls-how-the-papers-covered-johnsons-december-election
Murdoch & Co will get Brexit done!
The Daily Mail aren't even trying to hide their agenda.
-
Neither are the mirror..... the printed press being biased is not news.
-
If you thought Cameron was a feckless tw#t then there is an absolute goldmine of stupidity from the tory camp running up to the decision to have the vote, the vote and May's election, here's a sample of 'hindsight' from prince George, have your nosepeg at the ready.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46039623
-
Neither are the mirror..... the printed press being biased is not news.
Of course there's more to the story
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/03/07/how-left-or-right-wing-are-uks-newspapers
-
Jesus.
In that survey, 39-49% of people didn't know what the political ideology of the different papers were.
That is a staggering finding. So people are getting their news from the Express or the Mail and having no clue as to the political intentions of their owners and editors.
Frightening.
-
it would depend if they were interested in politics or not I suppose, many people buy papers and skip the political stuff and go straight to things of interest, same goes for other subjects of course
-
And to be honest they can’t read the paper very well if they don’t no there biased
-
it would depend if they were interested in politics or not I suppose, many people buy papers and skip the political stuff and go straight to things of interest, same goes for other subjects of course
And that's how it works Bpool.
Those papers KNOW that most folk are bored by politics. They want to get to the tits and togger stories.
But folk DO notice the headlines as they flick through.
So the newspaper staff write headlines which tell a clear story. Even if it's wrong. They write a story saying "Corbyn eats baby" and folk flick past it saying "Tut...worra Kitson."
And deep down in the text they tell you that Corbyn was actually seen eating baby sweetcorn.
-
ere Marge, is it called it yellow press cos they're scared to tell us the truth? no George luv is cos they're pissing 'emselves while they write it.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
-
''Great Barrier Reef: scientists find high levels of pesticides and blast chemical regulator. Pesticides found in reef catchment include Atrazine, a herbicide banned in 60 countries''
“More than 80 of the active ingredients registered for use in Australia are prohibited by the 27 member countries of the European Union,” the study says. “This includes 17 pesticides that are known to be or likely or probable to be carcinogens and 48 pesticides flagged as potential endocrine [hormone] disruptors.
“More than 20 are classified as either extremely or highly hazardous by the World Health Organisation. Three of the pesticides are subject to actions by international conventions but are still used in Australia.”
Trade deal with Oz anyone?
-
Can UK get 'super Canada-plus' trade deal with EU by end of 2020?
It took Canada 7 years. Average for trade deal is 4 years.
Claim
Boris Johnson declared Britain can have a “super Canada-plus” free trade agreement with the EU and by the end of 2020 and that “there is no need” for political alignment.
Background
Johnson issued the statement on Twitter on Sunday afternoon. Many believe it was part of a behind-the-scenes pact with the Brexit party that led to Nigel Farage’s party standing down 317 candidates in the election, though this has been denied.
‘’Johnson’s words are a statement of intent, but his ambition could be thwarted be some unknowns – an unfavourable election result, negotiation challenges and time.
Time is his most pressing concern. Trade talks cannot legally begin until the UK leaves the EU, which is currently scheduled for 31 January. Because the scheduled transition period expires at the end of December 2020, this leaves just 11 months to negotiate a deal that Canada took seven years to complete.
Theresa May had originally envisaged talks talking two years. Experts say that on average, it takes 48 months to negotiate any trade deal.’’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/12/can-uk-get-brexit-super-canada-plus-trade-deal-with-eu-by-end-of-2020
-
And there's a massive issue for the EU.
If they give us preferential terms, the other nations and groups that they have spent decades negotiating terms with (Canada, Japan, South Korea, MERCOSUR) will be watching like hawks and wanting similar benefits.
-
''EU launches legal action after UK fails to nominate commission candidate
British taxpayers face paying out for a large fine after the EU launched a legal action against Boris Johnson’s government over his failure to abide by the law and nominate a candidate for the new European commission.
Despite knowing for weeks that the UK would remain in the EU beyond 31 October, when a new EU executive had been due to be in place, Downing Street failed to put someone forward to join the bloc’s 28-strong top team''
Apparently he's been too busy touring flood affected areas :)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/14/uk-not-nominate-eu-commissioner-before-general-election-european-commission
-
''Ann Widdecombe 'was offered Brexit talks role to stand down as Farage candidate'
Exclusive: Brexit party leader claims other candidates were offered seats in Lords in move that ‘borders on corruption’''
Farage takes a dump on the Tories and all hell breaks loose, a month's a long time in politics :)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/14/nigel-farage-says-he-is-unlikely-to-vote-for-any-party-in-election
-
The National Institute of Economic & Social Research
the first 2 paras are taken from the full article (see link)
''On this basis, we estimate that in the long run the UK economy would be 3½ per cent smaller under the new deal compared to continued EU membership''
''Despite the name, trade typically does not move ‘freely’ under FTAs and UK businesses will experience many more frictions in trading with the EU than they do now. These frictions include non-tariff barriers such as customs and rules of origin requirements, regulatory burdens and barriers to market entry such as the loss of passporting in financial services''
''On 17 October 2019, the UK government and its EU counterparts concluded a renegotiation of the previous withdrawal agreement and political declaration which sets out the framework for their future relationship. The government hoped that this would enable the UK to leave the EU on 31 October 2019 and then, after a transition period lasting to the end of 2020, trade with the EU under a free trade agreement (FTA) while negotiating new trading arrangements with other countries.
This box sets out estimates of the economic effects of the deal on the basis that an FTA is in place at the beginning of 2021. On this basis, we estimate that in the long run the UK economy would be 3½ per cent smaller under the new deal compared to continued EU membership. The estimated effect is very uncertain. It is similar to our estimate of the deal proposed by Mrs May's government (Hantzsche, Kara and Young, 2018) because both involve an exit from the EU's single market and customs union. It is at the lower end of the range of estimates provided by UK in a Changing Europe (2019) in their analysis of Prime Minister Johnson's Brexit proposals. It is also somewhat smaller than the 4.9 per cent loss of GDP estimated in the government's published analysis of the effect of an average FTA (HM Government, 2018). The Chancellor has declined to update the government's analysis.1''
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/002795011925000104
added
It's likely you bst and Wilts and maybe others have already read and quoted from this
-
The National Institute of Economic & Social Research
the first 2 paras are taken from the full article (see link)
''On this basis, we estimate that in the long run the UK economy would be 3½ per cent smaller under the new deal compared to continued EU membership''
''Despite the name, trade typically does not move ‘freely’ under FTAs and UK businesses will experience many more frictions in trading with the EU than they do now. These frictions include non-tariff barriers such as customs and rules of origin requirements, regulatory burdens and barriers to market entry such as the loss of passporting in financial services''
''On 17 October 2019, the UK government and its EU counterparts concluded a renegotiation of the previous withdrawal agreement and political declaration which sets out the framework for their future relationship. The government hoped that this would enable the UK to leave the EU on 31 October 2019 and then, after a transition period lasting to the end of 2020, trade with the EU under a free trade agreement (FTA) while negotiating new trading arrangements with other countries.
This box sets out estimates of the economic effects of the deal on the basis that an FTA is in place at the beginning of 2021. On this basis, we estimate that in the long run the UK economy would be 3½ per cent smaller under the new deal compared to continued EU membership. The estimated effect is very uncertain. It is similar to our estimate of the deal proposed by Mrs May's government (Hantzsche, Kara and Young, 2018) because both involve an exit from the EU's single market and customs union. It is at the lower end of the range of estimates provided by UK in a Changing Europe (2019) in their analysis of Prime Minister Johnson's Brexit proposals. It is also somewhat smaller than the 4.9 per cent loss of GDP estimated in the government's published analysis of the effect of an average FTA (HM Government, 2018). The Chancellor has declined to update the government's analysis.1''
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/002795011925000104
added
It's likely you bst and Wilts and maybe others have already read and quoted from this
I've known and explained this right from the start but according to one gobshite in particular on this forum I couldn't possibly know anything because it would be in the future.
-
So one of the eu red lines is freedom of movement, labour will now abandon that and re negotiate migration rules within the eu, let’s see how they get on with that,andrew Marr asked corbyn 4 times if he personally wants to leave the eu and no reply! Why can’t he just be honest?
-
So one of the eu red lines is freedom of movement, labour will now abandon that and re negotiate migration rules within the eu, let’s see how they get on with that,andrew Marr asked corbyn 4 times if he personally wants to leave the eu and no reply! Why can’t he just be honest?
Here's what Corbyn actually said compared with what's written above.
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50449039
-
https://twitter.com/julie4nw/status/1196724489113030656
The Govt has not conducted, and has no plans to conduct any analysis of the effect of leaving the EU on the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement that Johnson negotiated.
I'll write that again, because I'm not sure I believed it at all possible that this was true, the first time I wrote it.
The Govt has not conducted, and has no plans to conduct any analysis of the effect of leaving the EU on the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement that Johnson negotiated.
That is...just beyond staggering. I conduct an analysis of the consequences of changing my mortgage and my pension arrangements.
But the Govt has not conducted, and has no plans to conduct any analysis of the effect of leaving the EU on the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement that Johnson negotiated.
-
Any brexiteers want to break this down for us?
''We'll make Ireland leave EU as well:" Doncaster MP hopeful comes up with 'Brexit solution'
An independent candidate standing in Doncaster at the General Election says he will solve Brexit – by forcing Ireland to leave the EU as well with the UK paying the funding it would lose instead.''
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/well-make-ireland-leave-eu-well-doncaster-mp-hopeful-comes-brexit-solution-1312441
Eddie Todd is also appearing at the comedy festival later this year :)
-
The best interview I've heard on a second referendum...
https://twitter.com/itvtynetees/status/1197560606494281729
There are no words...
-
Christ that is a car crash interview.
-
Billy sometimes it does worry me what kind of people we put in a position of power,whatever the party..
Normally this one would make me quite mad,but frankly i just had to laugh...
-
I agree WC.
I've said before that, as a student, I used to know very well two people who became junior ministers: one under Blair, one under Cameron/May.
Neither of them were remotely in the top level of thinkers. But both had an unwaivering confidence in their own ability and the gift of the gab.
The Tory one used to be a figure of ridicule in the student political circles at the time. He once spent 15 minutes given a speech in a debate about Apartheid, referring to Steve Riko. He did it several times before someone from the audience shouted out "It's BIKO you prick!" At which he looked down at his notes and said, "Ahh...err....ahh yes. Steve BIKO." The disturbing thing is that, over the last couple of years, when i say him being interviewed on the box, he sounded like a font of wisdom compared with some of the batshittery coming from his colleagues.
-
You won't be seeing this on the BBC :
Johnson is helping a hostile power the U.S. Army Chief of Staff described as a worse threat than ISIS.
British TV News would never put it this clearly. Brexit helps Putin divide & weaken the West and is a wholly unnecessary act of self harm by Britain.
The Tories are traitors.
-
Just announched in the Tory Manifesto that Johnson will not extend the transition period beyond Dec 2020.
Looks like No (Trade) Deal is back on the table. Or more likely accept all the terms the EU demand if he want's a deal.
What an international negotiator the man is turning out to be, how to give your opponent an advantage before the talks even start.
Go on then - vote to get Brexit gone by January!!
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1198611842899288064