0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on November 15, 2018, 04:39:21 pmHerbertNo. I'm not having that. You haven't provided anything to contradict what I said.The EU-27 agreed a negotiating position on the three major issues.IrelandBudgetRights of EU citizens in BritainThey told us at the start that those were red lines and without agreement on those issues, there could be no deal for us to ease the pain of Brexit. That has been very consistently adhered to by the professional, consistent and principled negotiators. There have been no major changes in what the EU told us at the start were red lines, and no other red lines introduced.We, on the other hand, have been ducking and diving and changing our line on a regular basis. What you were doing was giving examples of a couple of politicians who disagreed with the EU's negotiating position, not providing evidence that they had used it in an unprincipled, unprofessional or inconsistent way.Billy, I didnt expect you to have it! You come across as being completely unwilling to accept any criticism of the EU in any respect! I’ve given you 3 examples where the EU had been dogmatic and unprincipled and you’re completely dismissing them because they don’t suit your narrative! For the record I agree that our stance to negotiations had been shambolic, incompetent and not thought through but you really should understand that one side is not completely responsible for this
HerbertNo. I'm not having that. You haven't provided anything to contradict what I said.The EU-27 agreed a negotiating position on the three major issues.IrelandBudgetRights of EU citizens in BritainThey told us at the start that those were red lines and without agreement on those issues, there could be no deal for us to ease the pain of Brexit. That has been very consistently adhered to by the professional, consistent and principled negotiators. There have been no major changes in what the EU told us at the start were red lines, and no other red lines introduced.We, on the other hand, have been ducking and diving and changing our line on a regular basis. What you were doing was giving examples of a couple of politicians who disagreed with the EU's negotiating position, not providing evidence that they had used it in an unprincipled, unprofessional or inconsistent way.
WiltsI think young Rory has just inadvertently captured the core of current Conservative politics. "I'm producing a number to illustrate what I believe."One couldn't make it up. HE could, obviously, but no one else could.
If, for whatever reason, the UK does not leave the EU what effect, if any, does this have on the nature of democracy? Genuine question
Here is a question for our resident specialist political posters.I keep hearing that we have three options available to us, one being a new referendum.If it did go to another vote and somehow turned out to still be “leave” what would the situation be then.Obviously we would still proceed with leave but what would then happen about a deal or no deal.Would it be any different from the position it is currently.
A second referendum may be a way of getting us out of this current mess...or it could be the latest opportunity to overturn a democratic vote that’s been under attack since the result was announced
HAPlease explain why the vote I suggest would be unfair or undemocratic. It seems undeniable to me that in the 2016 vote, no-one knew what Brexit meant. I say that, because now, 29 months later, we STILL don't know what Brexiters means. It could be a No Deal Brexit. Or it could be the May Deal Brexit. But thats the point. The binary vote in 2016 was a false premise. NOW, we have far more clarity. We know what the real options are. So it seems to me that NOT having the vote I suggest would be the real undemicratic outrage. Am I missing something obvious? Is there a reason why this proposed vote would be undemocratic?