Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

Bless

---------- Post added at 16:42 ---------- Previous post was at 16:34 ----------

That certainly is the implication:



---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:42 ----------

You are forgetting the prime movers behind this project do not and have never have considered the negative impact to the country as a whole. This has always been about ideology and so logic and pragmatism are far down the list of priorities.

One of the sad parts about this process is that the supporters of the project have no regrets about what has been sacrificed on this journey. They are willing to accept literally anything to get over the line .. and at any cost.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

No it isn't. A Moderators/Admin's role is to direct the debate, but I did nothing of the sort yesterday. I do not recall once ever to tell any of you Remainers to shut up or stay silent.

I am however allowed to challenge, dissect and heavily criticise points raised by you and that is what I have been doing.

All I brought up yesterday, was yet again, I am fed up of seeing the same rehashed arguments from you and others, then as usual ranks of accusations of censorship ring out, some of you really don't know what true censorship is.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

I’m not forgetting. For many it’s simply about ideology in any case - you don’t have to look far to see some that won’t even entertain an extension for purely ideological reasons. That’s their democratic right.

Remainers squandered their opportunity for a second referendum or a customs union (some argue that’s not leaving - it’s not relevant any more whether it was or wasn’t) and at some point discourse has to move on. The electorate will not elect a 2nd referendum Government. Even if it did, I’m not convinced remain would win.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

I agree that the opposition to the Leave project was inept. The "democratic" mandate that drives the vitriol and indignation to any dissent is and always was flawed. Both from a wider definition of democracy and from a moral one. The proposition that 37% of a country's electorate can decide the destiny of the entire population can never be accepted as real democracy. Of course, we have a system that favours a certain outcome. Add the lies, criminality, targeted dark propaganda and misdirection and you arrive at where we are now. Had Leave won, having fought an honourable campaign with a costed and worked plan, opposition would have faded away.

Anyway, we are where we are and in this situation, as Project Fear becomes Project Reality, there is a ongoing need to hold the conmen to task.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

You keep telling yourself that if it makes you happy, but in the real world democracy is the least worst means of making decisions despite the fact that it almost always operates on a plurality rather than an outright majority. I don’t believe for one second that you would be making this same argument had the referendum results been precisely reversed.

Active Euro-enthusiasm in the U.K. is and always has been a niche pursuit, just as active Euro-scepticism is. The difference is that the euro-enthusiasts, mostly of the metropolitan, soft liberal left whose connection to the population at large is tenuous at the best of times, smugly assumed that the indifferent masses agreed with them. This has always been their weakness. The sceptics, however, understood that there was genuine anger at various economic and social changes in society and they believed they could motivate the masses to support them if they could show how our EU membership was culpable for those changes.

This they did, the rest is history.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

Succinctly put Chris. The big problem, Ianch99 has, is that he is consistently window dressing the idea that it was only the leave campaigns playing dirty, cheating. History recalls that both campaigns played by the same rules.

Remain alliance wheeled out Obama, with back of queue bullshit, that leaving would cause WW3, there would be 500,000 job losses the day after a leave result, that there would be a recession. All lies to scare and to garner votes. That’s how campaigns work, no political campaign is completely clean, and yeah it’s unfortunate.

Then the real dirty tricks by the Hard Remain alliances, criminal investigations launched against the likes of Arron Banks, Darren Grimes and others, who have now been cleared of any wrong doing. Basically, this was some sly attempt to discredit and nullify the result, because it didn’t go their way.

So the country for years kept hearing how the UK was conned in to voting leave, but then several other elections took place, two General Elections and a European Election, in that result, the UK sent to Brussels the Brexit Party with the most MEP Seats. Two other elections saw the nation, swaying to parties or party in 2017, 2019 that would carry out the UK’s wish to leave the EU, and yet this still don’t convince the likes of Ianch99 that the country has mandated its wish to leave the European Union.

I remember a Downing Street petition that had amassed 6 million signatures, to cancel and or revoke A50, though I recall it was possible to sign it several times. Then Echos rang out from Brussels trying to convince UK Government to think again screeching about the petition and how many had signed it, one had to question in what universe did 6 million beat 17.4 million?

Extensions given time and again, only to serve a purpose, they wanted the UK to have another referendum, because they didn’t like the first result and basically that’s how the EU expects democracy to roll in their world, to keep on voting until it gets the result it desires. That is not a true democracy. The UK showed the EU, no, we’ve voted, you got your answer, it now gets implemented.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

^^^

:clap:

Complacency at the top, and a belief the 'masses' would roll over to Government/EU spin

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

@Chris @Mick :clap::clap:

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

While it’s nice to see a “we won” party every once in a while there’s still an absolute lack of ideas for what the future could/should look like. Can’t really criticise the Government given the resource being thrown at Coronavirus response and the world being in unpredictable, and unprecedented, times.

Which is what makes the extension the most sensible option.

There’s no China trade deal coming soon. An American deal, what it’d look like, depends very much on what happens in November.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

Yeah but to be fair jfman, you at the time said there would be no brexit, it wouldn't happen.

We are on different teams, but can you imagine being told that what you thought you your side had won, to be told, well actually you haven't won. If we are smug about it now and I don't doubt that's how it appears to your side, we've fought a bloody lengthy battle to get here.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

No doubt about that, but would it make it harder or easier to strike a deal with struggling countries?

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 

I made that prediction in good faith, that essentially I believed “the Establishment” wouldn’t allow it, as it had vested economic interests and would undo the error of its ways. I’m sure you’d agree they tried pretty hard.

I also said if it did happen it’d have to “win” either a second referendum or a General Election - which it did in the December 2019 General Election. I also, correctly, pointed out that some of the “Brexit Days” wouldn’t happen and an extension inevitable - that was just observable reality from how unprepared we were to do so.

While I did vote to remain I don’t see it as “my side”. I’ve posted before about how Brexit in theory could work and present opportunities but the complexities around it would in some instances take years to unwind. More challenging if the plan is to not have a comprehensive free trade deal with the EU.

Viewing everything through the prism of Brexit undermines holding the Government to account at a time when it hasn’t been more important to get the decisions right. The ticking clock since triggering Article 50 has clearly undermined UK efforts in the process so far, with each negotiated withdrawal agreement arguably worse than the one that preceded it. The end of the extension period is another entirely arbitrary deadline.

---------- Post added at 12:37 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------

I’m sure it’d vary from country to country, but I can’t imagine any country credibly believes that we’ve had a long term coherent plan that involves being on WTO terms with most of the world on 1 January 2021. I think that leaves us in a weaker position than we could be in 18 months.

I’m not sure we’ve held a firm position for 18 months since the referendum between changes in Governments and General Elections.

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
 

This logic is deeply flawed as I have kept telling you so, several times and you would miraculously not be saying this rubbish, if Remain had won, conveniently.

And how many of the 1975's electorate decided the destiny of the country when it joined the Europe Economic Area...?

Lets see...

• In 1975, Population was 56 Million in UK.
  
• 40 Million registered to vote.
  
• Just short of 26 Million people voted in the 1975 Referendum. 17.3 Million (how very nearly ironic) voted Yes to remain in the EEA. Over 8 Million did not.
  
• So out of 56 Million people of the entire UK, just 17.3 Million people, decided the countries destiny and not even half of the 40 Million people electorate, because 15 Million did not bother to vote.

The key words is "not bother" that means they didn't give a shit and also then means, they cannot complain after when the vote goes a way they suddenly don't approve of. They had their right to a democratic process but the they chose not to bother for whatever reason, so you cannot never include them in a total percentage calculation, after a result to try nullify a referendum result, you cannot force people to vote, by not voting is also a true democracy.

So those who didn't vote in either referendum, clearly had no desirable preference, that they got off their arses and decided they had to vote. It's too late in the game to then complain after or attend mass walks.

What the 2019 General Election actually showed is that the silent millions who for the last 4 years, got fed up of being told by the Remainers, that they voted the wrong way, voted again to give the party that fully committed to implementing the result, it's 80 seat majority. (Effectively a landslide victory).