Re: Brexit discussion
 

No quite. Parliament is there to govern the country on half of the electorate. If they determine that the deal returned from Brussels is not in the best interests of the country then they have a duty to intervene.

This does come down to just dogma for some people: "I must Leave irrespective of the cost to me personally, my family, the people who did not want this and the country. The detail is secondary to the principle. I must Leave at all costs"

Sad times ..

Re: Brexit discussion
 

No deal back on the table where it needed to be, was crazy to have removed your biggest threat

Thwart, hearing that word makes me think we are back in the 1930's, which I imagine isn't far of the time a lot of brextremists would like to be in anyway

Wonder how keen people will be if it's effects actually start to noticeably hit them, I'd be quite keen to know what people will be prepared to sacrifice to leave, I think we've all accepted we'll be a tiny bit poorer but what if it's worse than that

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Not entirely accurate. Parliament isn’t answerable to a written constitution, interpreted by a Supreme Court. If it has any duty to intervene then it could be construed as a moral duty only, not a legal one.

The issue here is that parliament is sovereign, the only limitation being that it cannot bind its successors by any decision it takes. We don’t have an act of Parliament describing the authority or otherwise of a referendum, and even if we did, such a need act could not prevent Parliament from overriding it.

Referendums are alien to our evolving, uncodified constitution so its not surprising that there is this tension around the authority vested in them. What we do have, however, in the absence of a written constitution, is a very powerful sense of precedent and convention. Parliament is not, and cannot be, bound by any law or referendum result, in any legal sense, but the political power behind the referendum result, granted it by an act of Parliament and by the actions of our politicians before, during and after the vote, is difficult to resist.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I doubt there will be much sacrifice going on at all.

The affluent amongst us may notice a small increase in Rolex prices or the cost of that new Maserati. Exotic foreign holidays may be a tad more expensive but still easily affordable.

The poorer folk will just carry on getting further into debt buying the latest iPhone that they want but don't need, and possibly decide to keep that old Vauxhall Zafira for another year instead of trading up to an 08 plate Astra. Primark may see a rise in footfall :D

Seriously . . I don't envisage much change to peoples lifestyles at all, been there done that etc

Re: Brexit discussion
 

You are right of course, a moral duty if not a legal one. Referenda have always been avoided wherever possible because they lead to situations like this.

If Lemmings voted to leap over a small gap that they were promised was just small and easy to cross, are you then duty bound to at least ask them, once you all realise that there is indeed a cliff there instead, to consider their decision again? Or do you just watch them jump according to their original decision? The bad news is that they have tied themselves to you!

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Get to the back you'll have something to land on ;)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Nothing to see here, folks. It'll be just fine, trust me. :rolleyes:
https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2018/06/6.jpg
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...-scenario.html

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Nah pretty much all of what you said is fairly accurate actually. Your sarcasm is mostly true.

Just if someone who is rich says it, it will come off as snobbery / elitism etc.

---------- Post added 22-06-2018 at 00:11 ---------- Previous post was 21-06-2018 at 23:51 ----------

Technically Parliament is the will of the people.

Each individual constituency voted for a member of parliament - they all sit in the house now.

Some things were done as a result of it - that stuff led to May continuing on as PM.

So when the will of the people is raw in form, every member of the House is in office, having been elected.

When people tamper about with the system, you end up with what Cameron had - a coalition government with a parent (Tory) and child (Liberal Democrat) partnership. Or like in this instance, May who is propped up by the DUP.

The raw will of the people gave May no mandate, no majority and with a plurality of the MPs in the house, she decided to command a government and ended up ummm....thwarting the will of the people who chose not to give her a majority?

Now obviously there is so much cringe in that post, I would need to take a bath to cleanse myself from all the filth of it but to anyone who continues "this will of the people" stuff, there is an equally nauseating response.

I wish people would grow a spine on every level and stop harping on about it as if it is some sacred / holy cow. Like the Democrats keep saying that Hillary got 3 million more votes...clearly the EC and parliamentary mechanisms for winning elections and forming governments exist for a reason but seriously cut the crap about Parliament carrying out the will of the electorate. Only if they were to do that, they would have thrown May out of the window by now. Yet it is your lot who keep her hanging around - who else would want this mes on their hands?

---------- Post added at 00:24 ---------- Previous post was at 00:11 ----------

I don't know whether they do or not but it is hardly incumbent upon them to do it for Britain, is it?

Arrrrgghhhh - why should they? They have their 4 basic principles - why do they have to compromise, on anything? Davis came up with that same boat load of crap to Barnier, and what did Barnier tell him to go do?

How about this. Every time May says that she has a red line, how about everyone tells her to just "concede a little here and there?"

I mean she already does....ohhhh I get it!

Because we have a spineless leader who surrenders at every go, you want them to have one to level up the playing field!

Of course, that makes sense now.

Carry on.

Ummm...it's their cake. We are the ones who want a permanent Icing (trade) flour (financial) and egg (security) co-operation from them.

All the while saying that we don't have to contribute anything to it, don't help make it and all boast about having our cake, eating it and of course ignore the fact that such analogies are really masquerading for the fact that the size of our cakes are significantly less than their's with a way lower caloric count.

---------- Post added at 00:33 ---------- Previous post was at 00:24 ----------

Oh dear Lord.

I never thought that Spicy's fight with the media after Trump's inauguration would actually have some purpose to show a point for another political argument ever again, but here we are.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...fering-weather

Yeah, seriously.

I love Spicy, but seriously - that was a stretch and then some.

However you have somehow managed to take that analogy, to a whole new level.

I m speechless.

---------- Post added at 00:40 ---------- Previous post was at 00:33 ----------

Yeah I thought that the weather analogies were something...Hugh has a lot to answer for, lol.

---------- Post added at 00:46 ---------- Previous post was at 00:40 ----------

Oh I dunno lol...chickens crossed roads at Dover / Calais for decades and ended up dead / roadkill / meat for those in the jungle.

Now with queues and lorries backed up to a standstill after March of next year around the ports, chickens crossing roads in front of lorries has never looked like having more of a chance of success!

Boris even predicted as much in his latest audio recording.

Means that Gove definitely won't have to make the decision on whether to import in Chlorinated chickens or not. So in that sense, leaving the EU has definitely worked out for Gove - chickens everywhere and Kamikaze analogies in threads continue.

:p::p::p:

Re: Brexit discussion
 

More like the bottom of the barrel you mean.;)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Airbus could be leaving. North Wales probably going to be the worst hit but Bristol and Portsmouth have stuff too I think.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

This is what you get when the government has created its own shambolic mess over the Brexit negotiations...

Re: Brexit discussion
 

tbf the Govt. advised against Brexit. The people that caused this mess are the ones that believed the lies and voted for it. No one else to blame.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Airbus has said it will reconsider its investments in the U.K if there’s no transition deal post Brexit. Not quite the same thing.

I don’t know if you’re aware of exactly what goes on at Broughton, but it was part of my news reporting patch back in the day so I’m acquainted with it a little. The operation is enormous, and highly technical, employing large numbers of highly skilled men and women who manufacture wings for a number of Airbus planes.

Such is the expertise at the site that when the A380 was developed, they chose to build the wings there even at the inconvenience of having to work out how to transport them by road to the nearest port so they could then go by coastal barge to France for assembly.

They simply aren’t going to move the manufacture of any current product out of North Wales. It would cause massive disruption and cost to their business.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Fair enough but if they start reducing their investments it becomes a matter of slowly winding it down doesn't it? No big sharp shock but the slow starvation of investment. New equipment is built elsewhere until the point where there is nothing left to do here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ears-f6jnc7x2j

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I think because things move so slowly and other factors are involved, you'd need something like Airbus relocating for people to realise the impact of Brexit.
From the company's own website
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...-scenario.html

As reported in today's Times:
"Airbus prepares to take flight
The European aerospace company Airbus is set to become the first big manufacturer to pull investment from Britain after losing patience with Theresa May's stalled Brexit negotiations. Airbus, which generates £1.7 billion in tax revenues, is preparing to abandon plans to build aircraft wings at its British plants and move production to China, the US or elsewhere in Europe. It is making a series of investment decisions this summer because of worries that EU safety certifications will not apply from March next year and uncertainty over customs checks."

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 ----------

It's worth reading Airbus's risk assessment, including this:
http://www.airbus.com/company/worldw...k.html#Economy
Of course, some people believe that the talks are making good progress and everyone else is deluded.