Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35845124)

If that deal includes free movement of people and paying into the EU, which it will do......then what was the point?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845127)

Taking back control.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35845124)

If we want access to the single market we will have to accept free movement of people, pay into Europe and accept all the rules regulations and bureaucracy.

So what was the point.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35845129)

One of the biggest, if not the biggest issue of the debate was control of our borders - free movement of people within the eurozone.

Unless the EU capitulate entirely, if we want access to the single market or some kind of associate status, I'm pretty sure that we would be required to agree to free movement of people.

So we won't be taking control of our borders that way.

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35845132)

Why would we need to agree to that? We are a big market for them. We should be in the driving seat with negotiations.

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845088)

Surely Labour are not so clueless as try to over rule a referendum are they? Could you imagine another Brexit campaign?

It would be vile, poisonous, hate filled, we do not want or need that! Not forgetting labour voters in the majority voted LEAVE!

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35845102)

[QUOTE=ntluser;35845074]I don't really understand why David Cameron chose to step down because the EU Referendum result not only gave him the greatest weapon for reforming the EU but also provided a beacon of hope for all other dissatisfied voters in the other countries within the EU.

The Leave voters don't want to remain in the EU as presently organised but that is not to say that changes cannot be made, though they would have to lead to a much better deal than the one offered which was pathetic.

All EU countries could decide to give up completely any idea of forming a European Superstate and formally put that into EU rules.

They could legislate to make the national courts the supreme courts in any EU country.

They could still have freedom of movement within the EU but within limits specified by national governments, such limits to include the expulsion of criminals and other undesirable elements and limits on numbers.

We could go back to being a trading nation and the EU could dismantle some of the more expensive parts of its infrastructure.

Cameron would not have to activate Article 50 immediately. He could propose changes to make the EU more acceptable and less meddlesome.

He could point out that there is anti-EU sentiment throughout the EU and that if nothing is done the UK Brexit might be an example other countries want to follow. Better to have a really reformed EU than one that decomposes altogether.

And while he is doing all this he can dangle Article 50 over them like the Sword Of Damocles, something he could be doing for years.

In this way we could still remain in the EU complete with our sovereignty, continued access to the EU market with a lot less EU interference and expense. We could also keep the UK united with no need for independence votes.

All we have to do is delay our use of Article 50 so long as the EU reforms and is working for us and all other countries in the EU.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35845129)

One of the biggest, if not the biggest issue of the debate was control of our borders - free movement of people within the eurozone.

Unless the EU capitulate entirely, if we want access to the single market or some kind of associate status, I'm pretty sure that we would be required to agree to free movement of people.

So we won't be taking control of our borders that way.

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845137)

We could still have free movement of people but within limits specified by the UK government.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845135)

Looks like sturgeon is gearing up for another referendum

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845138)

If there are limits it's no longer free.

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845141)

If we want open borders we can have them, it will be up to us though, not the EU.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35845134)

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845147)

I don't see the EU being willing to make the kind of concessions we need. Nor do I see Labour as having the resolve to hold out for the deal we want. It will be another case of stay in the EU at any cost.

Leaders will only start to change their minds when voters in their countries start voting to leave the EU.

Might be worth holding off until after the French and German elections, when EU leaders may be more willing and able to go back to being a trading EU of sovereign nations not a politically dominated one.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845143)

Yes it will. It will be a condition of the deal with the EU but it will be up to us whether or not we take said deal.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845138)

If there are limits it's no longer free.

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845150)

Freedom of movement would be relative not absolute.

We say the chaos at borders when the Syrian refugees tried to force their way across borders to a place of safety.

Why were they stopped or delayed if there was complete freedom of movement?

No country has adequate resources to cope with a mass influx of immigrants and thus there had to be some controls.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845149)

I wonder how many people will look at their pension statements and put pressure for such a deal

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845153)

I can a general election and a pledge to join the EEA

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845133)

They're a bigger market to us as a proportion of GDP.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845152)

Quite.

This is pretty awful.

Agree with the result or not wanting the government to change the rules to void the democratic vote of the people is disgusting. That's banana republic stuff.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845155)

That will do nicely. May not be enough to placate the Scottish obsession with the EU but would tick many boxes for me.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35845151)

"Freedom of movement" is a European construct ,Syria is not in Europe

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845160)

I feel the person most culpable for this Leave defeat is Corbyn. It seems the group that swung the vote for Leave were the Labour supporters and he did nothing to try and pursuade them that leaving would be a mistake.

He has to go ..

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35845156)

So what. We're still a much bigger market than the likes of Norway.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845161)

Sturgeon has worded it very carefully, she says single market. London will push for that too.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845161)

Sturgeon has worded it very carefully, she says single market. London will push for that too.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35845163)

Motion of no confidence issued against Jeremy Corbyn

Why am I not surprised?

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845164)

Do you mean you have to be European to benefit from Freedom Of Movement?

Surely, the present EU Freedom Of Movement is an absolute. You either have Freedom of Movement in the EU or you don't.

You've also got to ask how it is that people can move from one side of the Schengen zone without any checks until they reach Calais?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35845152)

Quite.

This is pretty awful.

Agree with the result or not wanting the government to change the rules to void the democratic vote of the people is disgusting. That's banana republic stuff.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845160)

I feel the person most culpable for this Leave defeat is Corbyn. It seems the group that swung the vote for Leave were the Labour supporters and he did nothing to try and pursuade them that leaving would be a mistake.

He has to go ..

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35845178)

MPs submit Corbyn no confidence motion

Looks like your wish may be granted.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35845131)

No we won't ,the US trades with the single market and they don't have to accept free movement or pay into Europe

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35845180)

Well the political landscape has been turned upside down overnight and where it will end one can only guess.

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845130)

The interesting question is who will pick up the tab for the UK's missing contribution?
.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35845131)

No we won't ,the US trades with the single market and they don't have to accept free movement or pay into Europe

Originally Posted by jamiefrost (Post 35845181)

The US and Canada don't have the same level of access and Norway for example who had to sign up to free movement of people among other things to get this level of access

J

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35845174)

Totally agree.

There was a majority vote to leave - let's work together to make it work.

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35845132)

Why would we need to agree to that? We are a big market for them. We should be in the driving seat with negotiations.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35845187)

We will have access to the single market ,on what terms is up to any agreement we reach ,it does not have to include free movement as Pierre said .

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35845185)

We'll end up paying to access the single market.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845153)

I can a general election and a pledge to join the EEA

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35845177)

If those who're supposed to be running the show in Europe have any sense they'll negotiate the way through this to the mutual benefit (or as close to it as possible) of both sides. If they can't do that why on Earth would we have any faith in them to carry on running an EU with us inside it and entirely dependent on their flawed decision making? Only if they resort to bitter recriminations will things necessarily be tough for everyone.

Originally Posted by jamiefrost (Post 35845192)

Agreed but I don't see the EU allowing the same level of access as we had, without meeting terms which have been set out time and time again.

J

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35845178)

MPs submit Corbyn no confidence motion

Looks like your wish may be granted.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35845168)

She worded it very clearly and precisely she wants a 2nd referendum on Scottish Independence.

Scotland voted remain so I can see her point. The problem is, will the EU still exist when it happens and what is Scotland going to do then?

Originally Posted by techguyone (Post 35845200)

To be honest, this is a great time for Labour to get shot off, and elect a new leader, at this stage of the game, with huge numbers of people fed up with austerity, cuts, and general negativity, people should be flocking to Labour's side, but whilst he remains as Leader, they are unelectable.
Seeing as we're now in a period of great change and upheaval, they may as well do it now whilst it'll be lost in the general melee.
If they pick right, they*may*stand a fair chance at the next GE.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35845174)

Totally agree.

There was a majority vote to leave - let's work together to make it work.

Originally Posted by techguyone (Post 35845200)

To be honest, this is a great time for Labour to get shot off, and elect a new leader, at this stage of the game, with huge numbers of people fed up with austerity, cuts, and general negativity, people should be flocking to Labour's side, but whilst he remains as Leader, they are unelectable.
Seeing as we're now in a period of great change and upheaval, they may as well do it now whilst it'll be lost in the general melee.
If they pick right, they*may*stand a fair chance at the next GE.

---------- Post added at 13:20 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------



Give them what they want, we all know it's going to neverendum forever otherwise, the next one is #indyref2 apparently.

Shame they didn't get it right last time, it would have stopped a whole bitchfest.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35845202)

Return of Milliband ?

the one that doesn't have a funny face when eating :)

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845203)

This hinges on how concilliatory the Leave side are in their Brexit process.

One area of doubt, for example, is how the current EU funding will be replaced for the Arts, etc.. Campaign promises are one thing. It will need concrete and visible legislation proposals to allay the Remainers' doubts.

Originally Posted by techguyone (Post 35845204)

I don't know, he's been out of the game for a while, shame he wasn't picked first time really.

Both large parties seem to have lost their way or their original founding principles, it's a really weird time for politics of late.

Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35845195)

Agreed. There are plenty of opportunities here to respect the vote of both sides.

If the EU had given David Cameron a real deal that addressed the needs of the UK people more people would have voted to remain.

Even Donald Tusk admits that the EU meddles too much so it's time for the EU to reflect and step back.

We don't want a European Superstate. We don't want uncontrolled immigration. We don't want European courts overriding UK courts. We don't want the massive costs paid to maintain the EU infrastructure.

All these things can be changed by the EU and could persuade the new PM to hold back from implementing Article 50, keeping the UK within the EU and keeping the UK in one piece.

However, it may well be that the other EU countries will only see sense when voters in their countries start voting to leave the EU.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35845161)

Sturgeon has worded it very carefully, she says single market. London will push for that too.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35845070)

Some say the FTSE is well overvalued and was due a correction.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35845214)

Sturgeon dances round the ring like Muhammad Ali. Her statement was threaded right through with caveats. She had to make referendum noises this morning because her party has a massive lunatic fringe since 2014 and she can't afford a split, or even a hint of disunity. On the other hand she simply isn't stupid enough to call a referendum she might lose. She wants independence and she knows the next referendum will be the last, so she will keep her powder dry and only go for it when she knows she'll win.

What she really wants to do right now is ally the result in Scotland with that from London and NI in an attempt to give the nations and London the whip hand in planning for Brexit. It is very much in her interests to see the UK remain on good terms with the EU, because if the UK is totally disengaged it will make a future referendum argument all the more difficult. Scotland's economic and cultural ties are still overwhelmingly with England, not Europe, and she will lose any future argument that makes independence a straight choice between the two.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35845222)

apparently its undemocratic to expect scotts to accept the results of the democratic process .

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845223)

Meh, let Scotland leave, then they can't influence the result of elections should they happen.


Remainers need to realise all the doom and gloom they say will happen due to us leaving IS HAPPENING right now and for a few years in many British community's. NHS under strai , schools struggling to cope, jobs losses, etc etc.

But we must not forget about the Arts don't you know!!!! Talk about out of touch.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35845224)

Morgan Stanley looks to move 2,000 London staff out of the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/business-36561095

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845231)

A petition for a 2nd referendum approaches 100000 signatures which will force the government to give it consideration.

I say let Scotland leave the UK, then have a second referendum.

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35845236)

Can you post a link? I'm not demand evidence or anything, just curious..

Still, as Chris says, an internet petition doesn't necessarily achieve anything. Yes, the government are supposed to consider it when it reaches 100,000 signatures, but how do you know their definition of considering it doesn't just mean an Admin assistant looking at it for 30 seconds, thinking, then deciding not to put it up for discussion?

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845237)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7099996.html

Worth mentioning the legalise cannabis petition reached its 100000 target much faster than this one.

We should a petition for invoking article 50, that's what needs to happen. Once it's invoked we can still take out time. I can see us never leaving Europe even after a democratic vote. But I see massive unrest if this referendum is not respected.

Originally Posted by Big Brian (Post 35845239)

FGS whatever happened to respecting the outcome?

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845240)

There won't be a second referendum, it's just desperation by those who hate democracy and everything it stands for!

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845243)

I think Scotland voted to stay in the EU by 62% to 38% and are now being forced out by the rest of the UK. Some would say that is undemocratic ..

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845246)

Nigel Farage: £350 million pledge to fund the NHS was 'a mistake'



https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2016/06/23.jpg

Well, I suppose we did say that they were lying ...

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845243)

I think Scotland voted to stay in the EU by 62% to 38% and are now being forced out by the rest of the UK. Some would say that is undemocratic ..

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845247)

Farage was never part of the official Brexit campaign as you well know.

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845247)

Farage was never part of the official Brexit campaign as you well know. Now let's see if war breaks out across Europe just like Remain said it would.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35845251)

...
iv'e been to the shops and can report no rationing

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35845254)

The trouble is you tend to go to all those posh stores where there are generally one or two in there as you need to go to the cheap stores where they are queueing round the block papa.;):D

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845245)

They're going to potentially have a second in/out referendum if they vote to stay knowing we are leaving the EU then that will settle it. But the realisation that Scotland will be a target for immigrants from the EU that can no longer enter England may put them off.

Originally Posted by Paul M (Post 35845263)

Where did it say they would spend £350m a week on the NHS ?

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35845262)

See Farage has already backtracked on the £350 million a week for the NHS pledge. Tax cuts for the rich again no doubt. He could have at least had the decency to wait a week before coming clean on one of the many Brexit lies.

Also it seems the under 50's voted for remain. Its the selfish over 50's who have decided to screw it up for future generations. Let's hope pensioners are targeted in the many more years of austerity coming our way.

There is a possible get out if a general election is called soon, and Labour go into with a pledge of renegotiating with the EU. People might have had chance to realise how daft they've been by then.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845264)

Err .. here?

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2016/06/23.jpg

Although to be fair, Boris is scratching his head thinking "what idiot promised that!"

Originally Posted by Paul M (Post 35845265)

Ok .... I thought that was just a fake picture made up by someone.

Assuming its genuine, its still not a promise, just a suggestion, and not one anyone would/should take very seriously.
It would not be very sensible to give all the [saved] money to just one thing.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845268)

It may not be sensible but this was a strategic promise as I see it and would have influenced a sizeable amount of people. How many? Who knows? Who cares.

The point is this: someone here on Leave side should have the honesty and decency to say "Yes, that was wrong and may have given the wrong impression" and not try and pretend otherwise. You won what have you got to lose?

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845268)

It may not be sensible but this was a strategic promise as I see it and would have influenced a sizeable amount of people. How many? Who knows? Who cares.

The point is this: someone here on Leave side should have the honesty and decency to say "Yes, that was wrong and may have given the wrong impression" and not try and pretend otherwise. You won what have you got to lose?

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845268)

It may not be sensible but this was a strategic promise as I see it and would have influenced a sizeable amount of people. How many? Who knows? Who cares.

The point is this: someone here on Leave side should have the honesty and decency to say "Yes, that was wrong and may have given the wrong impression" and not try and pretend otherwise. You won what have you got to lose?

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35845262)

Also it seems the under 50's voted for remain. Its the selfish over 50's who have decided to screw it up for future generations. Let's hope pensioners are targeted in the many more years of austerity coming our way.

Originally Posted by Rexz (Post 35845272)

I voted leave and yes it was a bit stupid, as was a lot of things Nigel has said which are kind of tongue statements not ideal for a public speaker.

Now to state that maybe if they didn't put that it wouldn't have influenced a sizeable amount of people is just crazy. If you want the opposition to agree with you then you have to take a credible amount of blame on your side too.

Originally Posted by mart44 (Post 35845274)

I don't believe it was selfish for the over 50's to vote 'leave'. I think most have listened to all the debates and have indeed thought about future generations. Coming out might well turn out to have been the best thing to do for their children and grandchildren, even though they might at present get censured for doing what they feel has been right.

I saw a message put that, if unsure, a leave vote could be deferred for future years. However, the vote done now is permanent. This is true but in what state would more years of staying the EU in have seen the country? If it is thought that the EU is bad for our country, a few more years of membership may have seen it even worse ..and nothing can be reversed once done. This being the case, leaving sooner rather than later will have been the right thing to do for future generations, albeit that the action may not be currently appreciated by the young.

The trouble now is that just about all the ills that our country suffers in the future will be put down to leaving the EU when, in fact, we will just never know how our fortunes would have turned out if we had remained.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845275)

Let me ask this: if it is crazy that the poster would have influenced a sizeable amount of people then why have it with Boris on stage and why plaster it on the battle bus and drive around the UK with it?

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2016/06/22.jpg

For pity sake, this was not a Farage "tongue statement" as you put it.

They ain't going to spend this money on the NHS: you know it, I know it and we all know it.

I just thought people here would be more honest about this ..

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845273)

You lost stop clutching at straws, it was made very clear before yesterday that the £350million figure wasn't correct as we had a lot back in rebates. Just like remain declaring all out war in Europe if we voted leave was proven incorrect so was not a reason to vote in or out.

Leave have won, we are leaving the EU now grow up and stop being so childish!

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845278)

There is always one idiot I suppose.



Yes they lied. They lied about the figure on the bus and they lied about the money being all spent on the NHS. It is a pity you haven't got the decency to be honest about it.

Deal with it .. they lied .. but hey, that's politics :)

Originally Posted by RBMark (Post 35845273)

You lost stop clutching at straws, it was made very clear before yesterday that the £350million figure wasn't correct as we had a lot back in rebates. Just like remain declaring all out war in Europe if we voted leave was proven incorrect so was not a reason to vote in or out.

Leave have won, we are leaving the EU now grow up and stop being so childish!

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35845278)

There is always one idiot I suppose.



Yes they lied. They lied about the figure on the bus and they lied about the money being all spent on the NHS. It is a pity you haven't got the decency to be honest about it.

Deal with it .. they lied .. but hey, that's politics :)