Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Well there's only one way to find that out isn't there? We have General elections over a similar timescale, and people change their minds then, as they have a right to do. The implications of Brexit are far bigger and much more long reaching than any General Election. In particular there are 3-4 years worth of new voters on the register, who this will affect most. Also now there's a deal on the table, we know exactly what we're voting for, not some lie painted on a bus.

It's boring me like everyone else, but the implications are too important, to 'just get it over with', because it won't, negotiating a trade deal will drag on for years.

I can guarantee I'll shut up on the issue if we vote again and accept this deal ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

After all this time, you still haven't got it..... The job of an MP is to do what THEY believe is in the countries best interests. It is NOT to act blindly on their constituents wishes

They are representatives, NOT delegates

There are a large amount of people who do not understand this fundamental part of politics

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That is a total pile of steaming bullshit. So enough of this “you still have not got it” argument crap.

Our best interest is to leave the EU as democratically decided. They were elected, most of them on the premise of fulfilling our wishes. We shouldn’t have to have lying, deceitful MPs, going against our instruction to leave the EU!

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Whilst the above is true, The MP's themselves voted overwhelmingly to have a referendum and promised to abide by the result

They then overwhelmingly voted to enact Article 50

THEY made those decisions, by large majorities.

If those decisions were wrong then what makes any further decisions by the same people any more correct?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

We have got it. We are however pointing out that in this specific instance, parliament polled the electorate’s wishes, and promised to act on the result. The referendum, uniquely, altered the normal relationship between MPs and voters.

Everything that has happened in the last couple of weeks confirms that parliament is not using its judgment to best implement these wishes, but simply attempting to override them.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That Cameron promised to abide by the results of an "Advisory" referendum has been the problem all along.

Any referendum making such a promise should only be run as binding. Forcing every MP to support his comment has led us down this disastrous path.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Oh I say, that's a bit harsh isn't it?

By 'poorer citizens', are you alluding to the unemployed? Those who some on here say can't be bothered to work, which is why we need immigration, which is why there's a housing shortage, which creates homeless people etc etc.

Or maybe it's those on zero hour contracts, or those with minimum education, or those . . . I don't know, how would you classify a person as 'poor' nowadays?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Because you don't agree with something doesn't make it 'steaming bullshit' as you so eloquently put it.

What I have stated is fact even Chris below who i will often fervently disagree with accepts this.

---------- Post added at 10:35 ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 ----------


You might have, but others certainly haven't

This all comes back to the age old problem of there being no explicit narrative as to what 'leave' means.

A clear definition allows a clear vote.

This is MP's not knowing and being unable to agree as to what 'leave' means. However I will grant you that there are a proportion of MP's who will do anything to remain in the EU. Just as there are a proportion of MP"s who will do anything to ensure we have a 'Hard' Brexit.

Lets not forget if it were not for the ERG we would have been out by now.....

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

* Yes it does.

You have stated absolutely no facts but your own opinions because you do not agree with the democratic decision taken in 2016 and while I respect Chris a great deal, it doesn't really matter what he accepts, unlike you, I have zero need to necessitate someone else in to my reasoning as though it is some kind of unilateral qualifier.

Is this another baseless fact?

Pretty sure all of the Labour Party, all of the Lib Dems except 1 or (illiberal undems) as I call them and SNP, 1 Green MP and various other Independents all voted against May's deal, as well. So surely it's down to all these as well ?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I am sure it was you that said Brexit, including a Hard Brexit, had clear, compelling and coherent economic benefits? I am glad that you now recognise that it is a self evident leap into the abyss. What changed your mind?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Oh no, some may have "got it", those who want Hard Brexit at all costs but many only think that have they have "got it". Many believe that this current phase is the end. In fact it is the end of the beginning. We will have years of this crap ahead of us:

Attachment 28111

You well know that the Letwin amendment was a sensible insurance policy to stop the ERG voting down the bills to enact the WA and so run down the clock to a Hard Brexit.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Ok, here we go...

https://www.politics.co.uk/reference...itical-artiesp

https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../337/33706.htm note: this is from parliament itself not sure how much more proof you could ask for?

I can provide many many more, but, I'll ask you to provide one single solitary source that shows that a UK member of parliament is the delegate of their constituency.

My point (albeit made badly) that i made regarding the ERG is that had they not been so determined to pursue a hard brexit & that had they voted with Mays deal they had the numbers to ensure we would of left.

Source: any millions of news reports/political analysis

As always there's guilt on both sides, you can't implicitly say that 'remainers have prevented Brexit' because the ERG played a significant part in blocking. as it's not the Brexit that they want

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

And how exactly is any WA of any sort, not a hard Brexit? The WA, according to EU law is only meant to be "transitional, and unambiguously limited in time". Once that limited in time, transition period is over, it's still supposedly a hard Brexit. The sole purpose of all these nonsense delaying tactics is to avoid Brexit altogether, or at least delay it enough for it to be hijacked even further.

Link
NB TWO agreements involved, but not necessarily required. The first being the WA, and the 2nd being in the future.

If MPs are that concerned about the country, while are so many of them supporting people like Corbyn and McDonnell?


Love to see all these tactics being allowed, if Scotland or Wales vote for independence. Imagine the uproar if they were even tried. All very one-sided, as always.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

What I have suggested is that the new trade deals and other measures such as free ports will transform our economy. I have always said that you cannot forecast with any degree of accuracy how much extra income we will get from all this. However, to twist that into postulating that we don't know whether we will benefit at all is a bit of a stretch, even by your standards.

The mere fact that we are presenting new opportunities of this kind to business is known to lead to a positive response. Just like reducing high taxation leads to more yield for the Inland Revenue. It is a known known.

Although some cannot seem to grasp the concept.

---------- Post added at 12:53 ---------- Previous post was at 12:41 ----------

What? Just in case of doubt, this comes from the Collins English dictionary:

‘If you leave an institution, group, or job, you permanently stop attending that institution, being a member of that group, or doing that job.’

Can’t get much clearer than that, old chap.