Cable Forum
Page 46 of 89 « First 3642434445 46 4748495056 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Brexit (Old) (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33706539)

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 08:15
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974230)
Once again a failure to understand what “enshrined in law” actually means.

It’s entirely democratic that everyone uses any approach (within civil and criminal law, we used to think this was a given until the Leave campaign) to justify their cause, and indeed bring it forward at every general election they wish.
Please don't unjustifiably insult me. For this case, "Enshrined in law" means, in ordinary language, that statute states the date of leaving the EU. For example reported in:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44623619

Parliament could repeal the EU Withdrawal Act, though I'm not sure of the mechanism other than specific primary legislation (rather than an amendment to a motion).

jfman 08-12-2018 09:14
Re: Brexit
 
Emergency legislation could be used in a very short timescale if there’s the will in Parliament. There are a number of instances of rushed legislation. Here are two examples:

Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1974 was announced on 25th November 1974, passing on the 29th of the same month. More recently the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998 passed in just two days during summer recess.

As soon as it gets framed as a national security/civil contingencies manner due process goes out the window.

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 09:19
Re: Brexit
 
Fanciful.

jfman 08-12-2018 09:24
Re: Brexit
 
I don’t see it as fanciful. If Parliament wants to extend article 50 or have a second referendum they aren’t going to sit at the beginning of March and go “ach let’s just leave we’ve run out of time, it takes about six weeks to introduce primary legislation”.

They will make it work, if that’s what’s they want to do. It’s the Parliamentary arithmetic I’d be most worried about, not the clock.

Mr K 08-12-2018 10:07
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974227)
If Remain had won the first Referendum in a 52/48 ratio and the Leave camp bitched for a second Referendum, the Remainers would pretend to be affronted etc.
Didn't Farage say before the result that if it was 52:48, it wouldn't be the end of the matter ? It wasn't a decisive, opinion has shifted, and people really don't know what they were going to get with a Brexit vote. Incredibly they still don't.

Trouble is, as Brexiters have eventually realised, all exit options are considerably worse than we have now. This has caused them to steadily implode in a puff of reality...

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 10:12
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974239)
I don’t see it as fanciful. If Parliament wants to extend article 50 or have a second referendum they aren’t going to sit at the beginning of March and go “ach let’s just leave we’ve run out of time, it takes about six weeks to introduce primary legislation”.

They will make it work, if that’s what’s they want to do. It’s the Parliamentary arithmetic I’d be most worried about, not the clock.
Well, of course you don't. You're going off into the realms of imagination, finding devices the Parliament might use to repeal Brexit because time is short. It's the government of the day that has to introduce primary legislation.


If you're mooting that the Tory led government will repeal Brexit then that really is fanciful.

Mick 08-12-2018 10:33
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974240)
Didn't Farage say before the result that if it was 52:48, it wouldn't be the end of the matter ? It wasn't a decisive, opinion has shifted, and people really don't know what they were going to get with a Brexit vote. Incredibly they still don't.

Trouble is, as Brexiters have eventually realised, all exit options are considerably worse than we have now. This has caused them to steadily implode in a puff of reality...
Nope the exit options are project fear from pathetic Remainers in Government/Civil Service.

However- It has done no such thing. In actual fact, I’ve seen a lot of Remainers come out, who’ve accepted they lost the Referendum and have now seen the EU’s true colours during the negotiations and would now vote leave in second referendum, they also cherish true democracy and that the overriding principle is that it is this that actually matters.

I absolutely know of no leave voter who I personally know, who’s changed their mind and still want to leave more than ever.

Remainers are likelier to get more than they bargained for when leave wins again.

1andrew1 08-12-2018 11:00
Re: Brexit
 
The exit analysis spans a number of organisations and people who can't all be Remainers...otherwise Remain would have won the referendum!

They include Leaver Chris Grayling's warnings and planning on the channel ports.

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/br...ing-bbc-video/

https://www.theguardian.com/business...chris-grayling

Carth 08-12-2018 11:42
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35974245)
The exit analysis . . .

stopped reading right there.

polls/analysis/statistics/forecasts . . . :rolleyes:

jfman 08-12-2018 12:10
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974241)
Well, of course you don't. You're going off into the realms of imagination, finding devices the Parliament might use to repeal Brexit because time is short. It's the government of the day that has to introduce primary legislation.


If you're mooting that the Tory led government will repeal Brexit then that really is fanciful.
Private Member’s Bills?

Literally any MP, including opposition MPs, can introduce legislation.

pip08456 08-12-2018 12:21
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974252)
Private Member’s Bills?

Literally any MP, including opposition MPs, can introduce legislation.
Your problem is that the two Acts you cited had little (if any)opposition.

This would not apply to any attempt to repeal the EU withdrawal act.

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 12:25
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974252)
Private Member’s Bills?

Literally any MP, including opposition MPs, can introduce legislation.
There are parliamentary standing orders that govern how Private Members' Bills get priority over other business.

Have you thought this through fully or are you on a wing and a prayer?

jfman 08-12-2018 12:33
Re: Brexit
 
Come March there may be little opposition on the basis of returning the question to the people in a further referendum.

One thing that’s clear is Parliament is against no deal. The idea it will be passive and “run out of time” is in fact fanciful.

If framed as a national security issue it can easily be done. Private Member’s Bills cannot be dismissed if they have support. Although I believe the Government would introduce the legislation to avoid a confidence vote anyway.

pip08456 08-12-2018 12:55
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974257)
Come March there may be little opposition on the basis of returning the question to the people in a further referendum.

One thing that’s clear is Parliament is against no deal. The idea it will be passive and “run out of time” is in fact fanciful.

If framed as a national security issue it can easily be done. Private Member’s Bills cannot be dismissed if they have support. Although I believe the Government would introduce the legislation to avoid a confidence vote anyway.
Come March there may not be little opposition.

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 13:01
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974257)
Come March there may be little opposition on the basis of returning the question to the people in a further referendum.

One thing that’s clear is Parliament is against no deal. The idea it will be passive and “run out of time” is in fact fanciful.

If framed as a national security issue it can easily be done. Private Member’s Bills cannot be dismissed if they have support. Although I believe the Government would introduce the legislation to avoid a confidence vote anyway.
Read the Parliamentary Standing Orders regarding Private Members' Bills.

jfman 08-12-2018 13:07
Re: Brexit
 
We will see what happens then, I’m only pointing out that the usual timescales can (and do) go out the window when Parliament is willing.

No deal Brexit presently “isn’t an option” in the minds of all but a few hard Brexiteers.

---------- Post added at 13:07 ---------- Previous post was at 13:04 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974260)
Read the Parliamentary Standing Orders regarding Private Members' Bills.
I initially referenced them responding to the point that only the government can introduce primary legislation. Which is not true.

Chris 08-12-2018 15:39
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974237)
Emergency legislation could be used in a very short timescale if there’s the will in Parliament. There are a number of instances of rushed legislation. Here are two examples:

Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1974 was announced on 25th November 1974, passing on the 29th of the same month. More recently the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998 passed in just two days during summer recess.

As soon as it gets framed as a national security/civil contingencies manner due process goes out the window.
Rushing legislation requires the will of the government, which controls the parliamentary timetable. You can’t get primary legislation passed in the Commons without at least the passive assent of the executive. There simply isn’t enough private members or opposition time to do it.

Pierre 08-12-2018 18:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974240)
Trouble is, as Brexiters have eventually realised, all exit options are considerably worse than we have now. This has caused them to steadily implode in a puff of reality...
Tosh.

This isn’t Brexit.

The only way Brexit could be delivered, without a load of fudge, was/is to leave on a hard Brexit and negotiate our future relationship from outside the EU.

The problem we have here is that May ( to her credit I suppose) has tried to deliver Brexit for everyone including the 48%, but instead has delivered Brexit for no one.

There is no way any form of Brexit can be delivered by March 19.

The deal will be voted down, then power reverts to Parliament and they’ll propose god knows what.

A second referendum at the end of January will probably happen.

But importantly the questions of this referendum have to be.

1. hard Brexit no deal
2. Remain

And absolutely not.

1. May’s deal
2. Remain

As the second choice is not really a choice at all.

---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974252)
Private Member’s Bills?

Literally any MP, including opposition MPs, can introduce legislation.
Introduce, yes.

But there has to be the will of Parliament for anything to happen.

I “introduce” to my boss what I think I should be paid every year, but if he doesn’t Have the will to agree with me. That’s where it ends.

jfman 08-12-2018 18:40
Re: Brexit
 
If you weren’t selective with your quotes and paid attention to the common thread across almost all of my posts it’s that we have a remain Parliament conspiring to stop Brexit. If the majority of MPs are happy to crash out without a deal then that will of course happen (Parliament is sovereign after all). We both know it’s not the case though.

Pierre 08-12-2018 18:55
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974257)
Come March there may be little opposition on the basis of returning the question to the people in a further referendum.
It’s the cowards way out for parliament, it’s what they’ll go for. This whole process has shown that Parliament is divorced from the electorate, they are there to serve themselves and not the nation. They are not representing us.

Quote:
One thing that’s clear is Parliament is against no deal. The idea it will be passive and “run out of time” is in fact fanciful.
I agree, but to first vote for a referendum, then to vote to implement the result of the referendum ( no conditions attached) to then turn around, stop and not implement the result will be seen as the day our parliament turned into a dictator and not the seat of modern democracy.

Quote:
If framed as a national security issue it can easily be done.
It won’t be, that’s just daft.

Chris 08-12-2018 19:00
Re: Brexit
 
I really can’t state this any more clearly: there will not be a second referendum unless the government wants one. There is not enough parliamentary time to pass the legislation, without the cooperation of the government, which controls the timetable.

Pierre 08-12-2018 19:08
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974287)
we have a remain Parliament conspiring to stop Brexit. If the majority of MPs are happy to crash out without a deal then that will of course happen (Parliament is sovereign after all). We both know it’s not the case though.
It’s a bit more nuanced than that.

There are remainers, that are also democrats.

I agree that parliament is majority remain, but amongst their number are those worried about going against the democratic will of the people will do to.

A) them first and foremost, and
B) The future of politics in the U.K.

There won’t be riots, brexiteers aren’t socialists after all. But as we’ve seen again and again, the quiet majority usually do their protesting in the polling booth. So it would be interesting to see what happens.

---------- Post added at 19:08 ---------- Previous post was at 19:04 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35974291)
I really can’t state this any more clearly: there will not be a second referendum unless the government wants one. There is not enough parliamentary time to pass the legislation, without the cooperation of the government, which controls the timetable.
The thing is though Chris, and I agree with you, but I don’t see that the Gov or Parliament have any other way out of this. So they will find a way to make it happen.

I don’t want one, i’m In the no deal camp, and let it ride philosophy at the moment.

jfman 08-12-2018 19:25
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35974291)
I really can’t state this any more clearly: there will not be a second referendum unless the government wants one. There is not enough parliamentary time to pass the legislation, without the cooperation of the government, which controls the timetable.
Vote of no confidence changes everything, for a Government clinging on by the skin of its teeth anyway. Threatened with losing a confidence vote May clings to power, blames Parliament for not backing her deal: proposes taking her deal to the people.

---------- Post added at 19:25 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974292)
It’s a bit more nuanced than that.

There are remainers, that are also democrats.

I agree that parliament is majority remain, but amongst their number are those worried about going against the democratic will of the people will do to.

A) them first and foremost, and
B) The future of politics in the U.K.

There won’t be riots, brexiteers aren’t socialists after all. But as we’ve seen again and again, the quiet majority usually do their protesting in the polling booth. So it would be interesting to see what happens.
They’ll say it’s democratic to put it back to the people. Whether you agree or not, it’s a plausible line that many will accept.

Leaving with no deal against the promises of the leave campaign carries similar risks.

I think there’s broad agreement on a 2nd referendum however both main parties wish to avoid the blame.

Pierre 08-12-2018 19:27
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974296)
proposes taking her deal to the people.
Any referendum that comprises of her deal or Remain is not a referendum. It’s not a choice.


I welcome a referendum on whether we want the May deal or not. That’s ok.

But if we vote “not” there would have hen need to be yet another referendum, where the choice would have to be hard Brexit or remain.

nidave 08-12-2018 19:37
Re: Brexit
 
If the TM's deal falls though in Parliament how will some of you react if she goes back to Parliament for a 2nd vote on her deal?

jfman 08-12-2018 19:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974299)
Any referendum that comprises of her deal or Remain is not a referendum. It’s not a choice.

I welcome a referendum on whether we want the May deal or not. That’s ok.

But if we vote “not” there would have hen need to be yet another referendum, where the choice would have to be hard Brexit or remain.
I agree it’s not a choice, but you have to remember these people wish to fix the result and frame it as “informed democracy”.

Labour will try to pin it on the Conservatives for getting us into this mess, blame will go in the other direction for not backing the deal. If the blame falls “equally” in electoral terms both main parties are no better/worse off. It’s a tightrope, but you can see Corbyn and McDonnell playing it well, while allowing Starmer and others to test the water.

---------- Post added at 19:38 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nidave (Post 35974300)
If the TM's deal falls though in Parliament how will some of you react if she goes back to Parliament for a 2nd vote on her deal?
It’s her prerogative if she wants embarrassed twice.

nidave 08-12-2018 19:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974301)
I agree it’s not a choice, but you have to remember these people wish to fix the result and frame it as “informed democracy”.

Labour will try to pin it on the Conservatives for getting us into this mess, blame will go in the other direction for not backing the deal. If the blame falls “equally” in electoral terms both main parties are no better/worse off. It’s a tightrope, but you can see Corbyn and McDonnell playing it well, while allowing Starmer and others to test the water.

---------- Post added at 19:38 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------



It’s her prerogative if she wants embarrassed twice.

So... you don't see any hypocrisy of bringing things (TM's deal) back to parliament to see if MP's still think the same way and people not wanting to put Brexit back to the population?

Sephiroth 08-12-2018 19:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nidave (Post 35974300)
If the TM's deal falls though in Parliament how will some of you react if she goes back to Parliament for a 2nd vote on her deal?
For my part, a second vote in Parliament should only occur to decide on a revised Withdrawal Agreement.

jfman 08-12-2018 19:58
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nidave (Post 35974303)
So... you don't see any hypocrisy of bringing things (TM's deal) back to parliament to see if MP's still think the same way and people not wanting to put Brexit back to the population?
I’m not really the person to take that point up with as I’m predicting a constitutional crisis where it does end up back with the people.

On the general point Parliament is all powerful in this process, so it’s her right to keep asking and run the risk of a no confidence vote and looking extremely incompetent.

Mick 08-12-2018 20:36
Re: Brexit
 
BREAKING: Tory MP Will Quince has resigned as a parliamentary private secretary over Theresa May's Brexit deal

Mr K 08-12-2018 20:54
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974310)
BREAKING: Tory MP Will Quince has resigned as a parliamentary private secretary over Theresa May's Brexit deal
Who ??? Another nobody.

Rats, sinking ship etc......

jfman 08-12-2018 21:02
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974312)
Who ??? Another nobody.

Rats, sinking ship etc......
At this point it’s not the names, it’s the numbers. This Government cannot govern.

Strategically losing the confidence vote and making Corbyn force remain (via 2nd ref) might be the best strategy for the Tories.

Mr K 08-12-2018 21:08
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974315)
At this point it’s not the names, it’s the numbers. This Government cannot govern.

Strategically losing the confidence vote and making Corbyn force remain (via 2nd ref) might be the best strategy for the Tories.
Mmmm, maybe it is a cunning master plan..... Slowly but surely Brexit dies. Cunning old fox TM ;)

Mick 08-12-2018 21:27
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974316)
Mmmm, maybe it is a cunning master plan..... Slowly but surely Brexit dies. Cunning old fox TM ;)
Brexit won’t die. Not when there is still millions of people who want to leave the corrupt empire. The fact you want democracy to die is pathetic.

Saw quite a few Frexit signs in the Paris protests today.... Anti-EU sentiment running high and by young people haha!!!

jfman 08-12-2018 22:19
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974317)
Brexit won’t die. Not when there is still millions of people who want to leave the corrupt empire. The fact you want democracy to die is pathetic.

Saw quite a few Frexit signs in the Paris protests today.... Anti-EU sentiment running high and by young people haha!!!
Nobody said they wanted democracy to die, however Brexit arguably isn’t a demonstration of democracy at all.

Protests in France aren’t because the EU is some Franco-German empire giving them control over the rest of us.

The fundamental problem is capitalism.

---------- Post added at 22:19 ---------- Previous post was at 21:37 ----------

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...erendum-brexit

With the health warning that it’s the Guardian:

Cabinet split over second referendum. Will May be so bold as to rule out no deal and put her deal to the public vs remain? She might actually win, cement a legacy and crush division in her party at the same time.

Carth 08-12-2018 22:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974317)

Saw quite a few Frexit signs in the Paris protests today.... Anti-EU sentiment running high and by young people haha!!!
Now don't be daft Mick, you've been told time and time again that it's only the elderly (and dwindling) section of the population that want to quit the EU ;)

jfman 08-12-2018 22:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35974326)
Now don't be daft Mick, you've been told time and time again that it's only the elderly (and dwindling) section of the population that want to quit the EU ;)
Polling data in the UK consistently supports that.

It’s not actually verifiable that the EU is an issue with French protestors.

Mick 08-12-2018 23:09
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974327)
Polling data in the UK consistently supports that.

It’s not actually verifiable that the EU is an issue with French protestors.
Poll Data suggests no such thing.

Emmanuel Macron disagrees with you, he said once not long ago that France would vote to leave, given the chance.

jfman 08-12-2018 23:23
Re: Brexit
 
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...-britain-voted

I shouldn’t have quoted a post that said “only” but it’s definitely skewed.

Protestors are upset at many things their own government is accountable for but will blame the EU.

Pierre 09-12-2018 08:16
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974319)
Will May be so bold as to rule out no deal and put her deal to the public vs remain? She might actually win, cement a legacy and crush division in her party at the same time.
That is a false referendum as her deal is not Brexit.

I don’t she’ll do it. She’ll lose.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 11:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974330)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...-britain-voted

I shouldn’t have quoted a post that said “only” but it’s definitely skewed.

Protestors are upset at many things their own government is accountable for but will blame the EU.
That analysis of the stats can be all things to all men. For example, the selection of age groups; 25-49 is arbitrary. Yet it can significantly sway a reader’s impREssion. Just because car insurer’s penalise under-25s doesn’t put a 25 year old anywhere near the wisdom level of a 49 year old. I would like to see those stats banded by specific age so that a maturity trend can be sensibly deduced.

The way they are presented by YouGov puts older people into a bracket that is derided by younger people without definable reason.

That aside, I was in the 24-49 band when we joined the EEC and very pleased I was on that day. By the age of 49, it had become the EU and had morphed from a free trade association into the awful machine that has shown its true despicable colours since the Brexit Referendum.

Also during that time, Germany has played the creation of the Euro to its advantage so that they now have an illegal 8% GDP surplus and are too powerful (hegemonic) to be challenged by Brussels. As a result, that 8% surplus is paid for by the deficits in the rest of the Eurozone. It’s no coincidence that Germany and the UK are the largest net contributors to the EU budget - we have an independent currency and Germany owns the Euro.

As to immigration, I’m not stupid and I approve of free-movement of labour from the EU. I’m not against the Norway model either, provided that we are not in the CU. If we leave the CU, we have to adjust to the new situation and after trade deals have been arranged, including cheaper food, that will become the norm.

I’ll go and spoil it all now by saying that there are scores to settle with the perfidious Varadkar and that running dog Macron. I want to see them squirm as France loses access to our fishing waters other than on our terms. I want to see Varadkar squirm as Brussels orders him to establish customs posts and close the little roads; I’d like to see Brussels squirm as they alternatively break their own laws by not ordering that perfidious Varadkar to erect customs posts. I’d like to see New Zealand butter replace French and Irish butter (but I must have Lurpak unsalted or equivalent!).

As to a second referendum, it is as democratic to deliver the first Referendum result as it would be to hold a 2nd referendum. No referendum can be called undemocratic. But there are logical inconsistencies here. The first Referendum was binding; a second referendum can thus only be advisory. If a 2nd referendum occurs and the result is Remain, there is some negotiation to be done to get the EU to deliver on one part of the Cameron deal; namely no ever closer union and no Euro.

I’m tRying to show some realism here and would far prefer to leave the EU on a no deal basis given current circumstances.

I am ashamed of our politicians; they had a duty to deliver the Referendum and not try and defeat it, that being the height of using democracy to usurp democracy. The public are also ashamed of the politicians and where we go from here in parliamentary and party terms is anyone’s guess.

What a shambles. There is no god or he is Franco/Irish!

jfman 09-12-2018 13:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974340)
That is a false referendum as her deal is not Brexit.

I don’t she’ll do it. She’ll lose.
Will she care?

She's a remainer, and it scuppers the dreams and ambitions of those who were so desperate to knife her in the back. She remains the PM who took the difficult decisions, who actually negotiated a deal rather than snipe from the backbenches and gave it back to the people to make their mind up after Parliament refused to back her.

In a vote between May's deal and remain, she technically can't lose.

Mick 09-12-2018 13:23
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974351)
Will she care?

She's a remainer, and it scuppers the dreams and ambitions of those who were so desperate to knife her in the back. She remains the PM who took the difficult decisions, who actually negotiated a deal rather than snipe from the backbenches and gave it back to the people to make their mind up after Parliament refused to back her.

In a vote between May's deal and remain, she technically can't lose.
Why do we need to give it back to the people - is that to...
  • 1) Ignore the democratic decision taken in 2016, because YOU did not like the result?
  • 2) Over turn the first vote because it was a decision made that YOU do not like?
  • 3) Because you want to cause further uncertainty in your selfish determination to ignore democracy and over turn the democratic result taken in 2016?
  • 4) Because you are selfish ?
  • 5) You love abusing democracy ?
  • 6) You want to destroy faith people have in democracy by ignoring a democratic decision taken in 2016.
  • 7) You want to disrespect all the dead people who died to give us the freedoms of a true democratic nation ?
  • 8) ALL THE ABOVE.

denphone 09-12-2018 13:31
Re: Brexit
 
The knives are getting readied for Theresa May if as very likely she is going to lose the vote heavily on Tuesday.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...te-brexit-deal

Quote:
Three Brexit-supporting former cabinet ministers have signalled in television interviews that they would be interested in running for the Conservative leadership if Theresa May is forced to resign after Tuesday night’s critical Brexit vote, in a sign of the prime minster’s crumbling authority.
Quote:
Boris Johnson, Esther McVey and Dominic Raab all refused to rule out leadership bids and called on May to persuade the EU to ditch the backstop and withhold some of the £39bn divorce bill, though Brussels has said no further negotiation is possible.

jfman 09-12-2018 13:39
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974352)
Why do we need to give it back to the people - is that to...
  • 1) Ignore the democratic decision taken in 2016, because YOU did not like the result?
  • 2) Over turn the first vote because it was a decision made that YOU do not like?
  • 3) Because you want to cause further uncertainty in your selfish determination to ignore democracy and over turn the democratic result taken in 2016?
  • 4) Because you are selfish ?
  • 5) You love abusing democracy ?
  • 6) You want to destroy faith people have in democracy by ignoring a democratic decision taken in 2016.
  • 7) You want to disrespect all the dead people who died to give us the freedoms of a true democratic nation ?
  • 8) ALL THE ABOVE.
Nobody died so we can have a bad Brexit deal.

In any case, I'm not going to get into the circular argument over should it go back to the people. I'm posting on the basis that I think it will go back to the people, whether I think it should or not is broadly irrelevant.

Mick 09-12-2018 13:39
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35974353)
The knives are getting readied for Theresa May if as very likely she is going to lose the vote heavily on Tuesday.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...te-brexit-deal
Brexit should always have been put in control of a Brexiteer not someone who has clearly sabotaged it by allowing Remainers in government and the civil service to dictate a deal that is an utter farce.

jfman 09-12-2018 13:43
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974355)
Brexit should always have been put in control of a Brexiteer not someone who has clearly sabotaged it by allowing Remainers in government and the civil service to dictate a deal that is an utter farce.
Were Davis and Raab not Brexit enough? At the same time as promoting Brexit supporting MPs to the foreign secretary and international trade positions?

They've had plenty of opportunity to feed into the process and failed at every turn. It's time for Brexit to be handed over to the adults, who can attempt to euthanise it for everyone's good.

Hugh 09-12-2018 13:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974352)
Why do we need to give it back to the people - is that to...
  • 1) Ignore the democratic decision taken in 2016, because YOU did not like the result?
  • 2) Over turn the first vote because it was a decision made that YOU do not like?
  • 3) Because you want to cause further uncertainty in your selfish determination to ignore democracy and over turn the democratic result taken in 2016?
  • 4) Because you are selfish ?
  • 5) You love abusing democracy ?
  • 6) You want to destroy faith people have in democracy by ignoring a democratic decision taken in 2016.
  • 7) You want to disrespect all the dead people who died to give us the freedoms of a true democratic nation ?
  • 8) ALL THE ABOVE.
ALL OF THE ABOVE means accepting, as a given, your definition of "democracy".

I personally believe democracy is based in relevant information about the subject being discussed, and if we learn more about the subject, we should be allowed to change our mind.

Saying "you’re only allowed one vote, and you’re stuck with it" is like a teenage child asking if they can bring a few friends over, you agree, and on the night they have 50 drunken mates turn up, you gave every right to say "no, this is not what I agreed to".

I had friends who were injured in NI, and I think anything that leads to the GFA being a negated is an insult to their sacrifice, but I don’t call anyone who thinks differently ‘selfish’ or ‘a traitor".

Democracy is about being tolerant of differing views, not denigrating those who disagree with your views.

denphone 09-12-2018 13:51
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974355)
Brexit should always have been put in control of a Brexiteer not someone who has clearly sabotaged it by allowing Remainers in government and the civil service to dictate a deal that is an utter farce.
But when Davis Cameron resigned after the referendum result the Conservatives had every chance to elect someone more far more Brexit leaning in their approach as they knew what they electing when they made Theresa May their new leader.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 14:05
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35974358)
But when Davis Cameron resigned after the referendum result the Conservatives had every chance to elect someone more far more Brexit leaning in their approach as they knew what they electing when they made Theresa May their new leader.
That's too easy to say! We all know that the chance was wasted because Gove stiffed Johnson, retribution forced Gove out, leaving Leadsom alone in the fray with May. Leadsom withdrew, being a lightweight and thus the Conservative membership did not get the chance to vote. You could say that the membership was stiffed too.

Now the nation is being stiffed.

denphone 09-12-2018 14:16
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974359)
That's too easy to say! We all know that the chance was wasted because Gove stiffed Johnson, retribution forced Gove out, leaving Leadsom alone in the fray with May. Leadsom withdrew, being a lightweight and thus the Conservative membership did not get the chance to vote. You could say that the membership was stiffed too.

Now the nation is being stiffed.
No not really as they all knew what the referendum result was in the incumbent government of the day and they all quite clearly had a chance to elect a leader in the leadership contest more in tune in what was voted for in the referendum but the Conservative party as has been the case for many a year now with regards to to the issue of Europe is in a permanent civil war with itself on the issue.

---------- Post added at 14:16 ---------- Previous post was at 14:13 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974359)
the Conservative membership did not get the chance to vote. You could say that the membership was stiffed too.

Now the nation is being stiffed.
Democracy as it seems does not stretch to its membership.

Mick 09-12-2018 14:55
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35974357)
ALL OF THE ABOVE means accepting, as a given, your definition of "democracy".

I personally believe democracy is based in relevant information about the subject being discussed, and if we learn more about the subject, we should be allowed to change our mind.

Saying "you’re only allowed one vote, and you’re stuck with it" is like a teenage child asking if they can bring a few friends over, you agree, and on the night they have 50 drunken mates turn up, you gave every right to say "no, this is not what I agreed to".

I had friends who were injured in NI, and I think anything that leads to the GFA being a negated is an insult to their sacrifice, but I don’t call anyone who thinks differently ‘selfish’ or ‘a traitor".

Democracy is about being tolerant of differing views, not denigrating those who disagree with your views.
I couldn’t give a shit who disagrees with my views. I do give a shit when ignorant people try to overturn a Democratic decision.

Btw your piss poor analogy about drunken mates and unwanted invitations is a lot different than an entire country voting to leave a corrupted union and they certainly knew what they were voting for !!!

jfman 09-12-2018 15:19
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974369)
I couldn’t give a shit who disagrees with my views. I do give a shit when ignorant people try to overturn a Democratic decision.

Btw your piss poor analogy about drunken mates and unwanted invitations is a lot different than an entire country voting to leave a corrupted union and they certainly knew what they were voting for !!!
I find it truly astonishing that 17 million people knew exactly what they were voting for but haven’t found a way to communicate it to our Brexit supporting politicians who can’t decide between the May deal, Norway(+), Canada(++), no deal or further negotiations.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 15:42
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974370)
I find it truly astonishing that 17 million people knew exactly what they were voting for but haven’t found a way to communicate it to our Brexit supporting politicians who can’t decide between the May deal, Norway(+), Canada(++), no deal or further negotiations.
That's a useless piece of sarcasm. How can 17m people communicate with the stupid, deceitful politicians in a meaningful way? Perhaps audience applause in Question Time? And that's often 50/50. Yellow Vest riots? Try saying something useful.

jfman 09-12-2018 15:48
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974371)
That's a useless piece of sarcasm. How can 17m people communicate with the stupid, deceitful politicians in a meaningful way? Perhaps audience applause in Question Time? And that's often 50/50. Yellow Vest riots? Try saying something useful.
I’m not obliged to fix the problems of Brexit (indeed, when I have made any suggestions I get accused of trying to thwart it because I don’t subscribe to the “leave as soon as possible regardless of consequences” brand of Brexit).

If there was a single coherent view of what Brexit should look like we wouldn’t be in this mess.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 16:02
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974372)
I’m not obliged to fix the problems of Brexit (indeed, when I have made any suggestions I get accused of trying to thwart it because I don’t subscribe to the “leave as soon as possible regardless of consequences” brand of Brexit).

If there was a single coherent view of what Brexit should look like we wouldn’t be in this mess.
What you don't want to get to grips with is that by Referendum, we voted to Leave the EU. It was always going to be messy because the guvmin did not take my advice from day 1 (!!) to go in hardball on the assumption that we would leave no deal (fully prepared) and that if the EU had any proposals, we'd consider them.

jfman 09-12-2018 16:11
Re: Brexit
 
I’ve very much got to grips with the referendum result.

However I’ve also got an awareness that this is a remain Parliament and our constitution is framed in a way that people are subordinate to Parliament. The system is pretty much designed to encourage creation of an impasse allowing Parliament to claim control of the process.

It’s a truly fascinating watch. They’ll make an excellent spy thriller about it one day how the result was seized back after the dark money/Russian interference/etc.

Mick 09-12-2018 16:14
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974372)
I’m not obliged to fix the problems of Brexit (indeed, when I have made any suggestions I get accused of trying to thwart it because I don’t subscribe to the “leave as soon as possible regardless of consequences” brand of Brexit).

If there was a single coherent view of what Brexit should look like we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Absolute bollocks.

Btw noone asked you to do a thing.

Brexit means and looks like leaving the EU in it's entirety which I have ALWAYS said from day one - it's not hard FFS. :rolleyes:

jfman 09-12-2018 16:19
Re: Brexit
 
You should write to all 650 odd MPs with that insight. This could all be sorted by tea time on Wednesday, as they’ve clearly misunderstood this situation massively.

Carth 09-12-2018 16:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974375)
They’ll make an excellent spy thriller about it one day how the result was seized back after the dark money/Russian interference/etc.
. . or alternatively, how the great British public were sold out for 30 pieces of silver

jfman 09-12-2018 16:23
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35974379)
. . or alternatively, how the great British public were sold out for 30 pieces of silver
Either way, it’ll be a compelling watch. :)

Mick 09-12-2018 16:25
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974378)
You should write to all 650 odd MPs with that insight. This could all be sorted by tea time on Wednesday, as they’ve clearly misunderstood this situation massively.
I shouldn't have to do any such thing - the referendum in 2016 was two choices - one was to Remain - the other leave - leave won - therefore we leave the EU and that meant in it's entirety.

Carth 09-12-2018 16:28
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974381)
I shouldn't have to do any such thing - the referendum in 2016 was two choices - one was to Remain - the other leave - leave won - therefore we leave the EU and that meant in it's entirety.

exactly Mick, and if everyone who voted - whether remain or stay - understood the simple question it makes you wonder how those 650 educated MP's didn't ;)

jfman 09-12-2018 16:31
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974381)
I shouldn't have to do any such thing - the referendum in 2016 was two choices - one was to Remain - the other leave - leave won - therefore we leave the EU and that meant in it's entirety.
However it didn’t say

a) when or
b) what the future relationship should look like

Given the vast range of economic consequences it’s reasonable to say the position is untenable until one clear leave model is backed in it’s own referendum.

If the leave vote is one single monolithic entity with a homogeneous view of what leave means you should have nothing to worry about putting it to the electorate for a rubber stamp.

Dave42 09-12-2018 16:39
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974381)
I shouldn't have to do any such thing - the referendum in 2016 was two choices - one was to Remain - the other leave - leave won - therefore we leave the EU and that meant in it's entirety.


that why some leave politicians where saying about staying in single market right and why parliament wont allow a no deal Brexit they know we fall of a cliff edge

Mick 09-12-2018 16:51
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35974385)
[/B]

that why some leave politicians where saying about staying in single market right and why parliament wont allow a no deal Brexit they know we fall of a cliff edge
You keep repeating the same rubbish about a cliff edge - it's utter project fear fiction!!!

---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:46 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974383)
However it didn’t say

a) when or
b) what the future relationship should look like

Given the vast range of economic consequences it’s reasonable to say the position is untenable until one clear leave model is backed in it’s own referendum.

If the leave vote is one single monolithic entity with a homogeneous view of what leave means you should have nothing to worry about putting it to the electorate for a rubber stamp.
It's already been to the electorate - Jeez - why do you have to be so obtuse ?

It should not have to bloody say, it's not hard.

Leave means leave - when you opt to leave your house, you don't keep one foot in there or, one arm or any part of you.

Leaving a group means leaving it completely - it really is not hard !!!

Gavin78 09-12-2018 17:13
Re: Brexit
 
I agree Mick

I wan't to leave, I voted leave and I didn't vote half in half out or vote on the losing side to have their say.

The only thing that has happened here is we got a vote to leave but remain get to decide how.

Pathetic!!!

jfman 09-12-2018 17:21
Re: Brexit
 
Well if leave had a coherent plan (Johnson, Gove, Davis, Fox, Farage) that was obvious - or even better on the ballot paper - it wouldn’t be up to the adults to take responsibility.

Far from pathetic it’s masterful how our constitution is protecting us from ourselves. The vast majority of the electorate, indeed the population, don’t deserve to be punished for the ill thought out positions of the few.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 17:29
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974394)
Well if leave had a coherent plan (Johnson, Gove, Davis, Fox, Farage) that was obvious - or even better on the ballot paper - it wouldn’t be up to the adults to take responsibility.

Far from pathetic it’s masterful how our constitution is protecting us from ourselves. The vast majority of the electorate, indeed the population, don’t deserve to be punished for the ill thought out positions of the few.
Which minority section do deserve to be punished?

Pierre 09-12-2018 17:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974356)
It's time for Brexit to be handed over to the adults, who can attempt to euthanise it for everyone's good.
Who are they, exactly?

jfman 09-12-2018 17:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974395)
Which minority section do deserve to be punished?
Those who campaigned for the myth can’t reasonably be described as being “punished” if they have to live with the consequences of their own ineptitude.

---------- Post added at 17:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974396)
Who are they, exactly?
Our sovereign Parliament.

Sephiroth 09-12-2018 17:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974397)
Those who campaigned for the myth can’t reasonably be described as being “punished” if they have to live with the consequences of their own ineptitude.

---------- Post added at 17:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:33 ----------



Our sovereign Parliament.
Dodging the answer again; just convoluted nonsense. If the vast majority don't deserve to be punished, who does deserve to be punished?
Those who campaigned for Brexit but didn't anticipate what obstacles the EU would put in our way?

Pierre 09-12-2018 17:50
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974372)
If there was a single coherent view of what Brexit should look like we wouldn’t be in this mess.
The Brexit was hat people voted for in 2016 was a hard Brexit, total removal from the single Market and customs union and all the EU institutions. However painful that might be.

Immediately after the result Remainer in Chief , Nick Clegg, coined the phrases Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit - they didn’t exist beforehand.

And since the result, the Remain contingent have used these phrases to obfuscate the process Ultimately leading to where we are now.

---------- Post added at 17:50 ---------- Previous post was at 17:46 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974397)
Our sovereign Parliament.
By you’re own admission, they are “ Remain” how can we trust them to deliver Brexit, they are complicit in the current failure we see before us.

Hugh 09-12-2018 17:52
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35974379)
. . or alternatively, how the great British public were sold out for 30 pieces of silver
Thats a bit harsh on Arron Banks- he got a lot more than that...

jfman 09-12-2018 17:54
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35974401)
Dodging the answer again; just convoluted nonsense. If the vast majority don't deserve to be punished, who does deserve to be punished?
Those who campaigned for Brexit but didn't anticipate what obstacles the EU would put in our way?
It’s not convoluted nonsense.

The English language is more complex than the binary choice you are seeking to frame my statement in.

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974402)
The Brexit was hat people voted for in 2016 was a hard Brexit, total removal from the single Market and customs union and all the EU institutions. However painful that might be.

Immediately after the result Remainer in Chief , Nick Clegg, coined the phrases Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit - they didn’t exist beforehand.

And since the result, the Remain contingent have used these phrases to obfuscate the process Ultimately leading to where we are now.[COLOR="Silver"]
My memory is hazy but I’m quite sure it didn’t say that on my ballot paper.

Quote:
By you’re own admission, they are “ Remain” how can we trust them to deliver Brexit, they are complicit in the current failure we see before us.
They are there to make the tough choices the people can’t be trusted with on a day to day basis.

Pierre 09-12-2018 17:57
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974383)
However it didn’t say

a) when or

It didn’t have to, the process was already known, two years after invoking A50.

Quote:
b) what the future relationship should look like
What do you want a ballot paper or 300 page study?

As I said, the outcome was clear, a hard Brexit is what was on offer.

After that the future relationship was to be negotiated, but from outside the EU.

Quote:
If the leave vote is one single monolithic entity with a homogeneous view of what leave means you should have nothing to worry about putting it to the electorate for a rubber stamp.
That is exactly what they should do. If there is to be a “people’s vote” is should be clear.

- Remain
- Hard Brexit ( now that there is no denying everybody is in full possession of the facts)

Hom3r 09-12-2018 17:59
Re: Brexit
 
I blame remainers for Brexit stalling 1,000%

They cannot take the democratic result

Hugh 09-12-2018 18:01
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974388)
You keep repeating the same rubbish about a cliff edge - it's utter project fear fiction!!!

---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:46 ----------



It's already been to the electorate - Jeez - why do you have to be so obtuse ?

It should not have to bloody say, it's not hard.

Leave means leave - when you opt to leave your house, you don't keep one foot in there or, one arm or any part of you.

Leaving a group means leaving it completely - it really is not hard !!!
Usually, when you leave your house, you know where you’re going and how to get there - that doesn’t seem to be the case for Brexit.

Brexit means Brexit is as meaningless a statement as Breakfast means Breakfast - if you asked 17 million people who said “Yes” when they were asked if they wanted breakfast, there would be no unanimity about what and when they wanted it. Some would want it at 6am, others 10am, and the rest some time in between; as for what they wanted for breakfast, the food requirements would range from toast, full English, granola, scrambled eggs, and multiple other options - to assert that all 17 million “Yes” voters wanted a Hard Brexit with "No Deal" is an assertion that cannot be backed up with factual evidence.

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:00 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35974408)
I blame remainers for Brexit stalling 1,000%

They cannot take the democratic result
I blame Leavers for Brexit stalling 1,000% - they didn’t have a plan to get what they wanted and just blame everyone else.

See - two can play that game...

jfman 09-12-2018 18:02
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974407)
It didn’t have to, the process was already known, two years after invoking A50.
Nobody said when A50 would be invoked. Two years beyond an undetermined date.

Quote:
What do you want a ballot paper or 300 page study?

As I said, the outcome was clear, a hard Brexit is what was on offer.

After that the future relationship was to be negotiated, but from outside the EU.
An informed electorate would be nice.

Quote:
That is exactly what they should do. If there is to be a “people’s vote” is should be clear.

- Remain
- Hard Brexit ( now that there is no denying everybody is in full possession of the facts)
Seems reasonable.

Pierre 09-12-2018 18:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974405)
My memory is hazy but I’m quite sure it didn’t say that on my ballot paper.
Well obviously you’re one of those thicko’s that had no idea what you were voting for. It was blindingly obvious to me given the information and debate before the vote.

You’ve just gone down a rung in my estimation, you’ Now on rung 0.

Quote:
They are there to make the tough choices the people can’t be trusted with on a day to day basis.
Oh I see now.......they ceded their power to the electorate in 2016. But the electorate got it wrong, in their opinion, so now the all wise parliament will reverse the will of the people.

That’s as Orwellian as it gets. Certainly not the country I thought I was living in.

jfman 09-12-2018 18:17
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35974413)
Well obviously you’re one of those thicko’s that had no idea what you were voting for. It was blindingly obvious to me given the information and debate before the vote.

You’ve just gone down a rung in my estimation, you’ Now on rung 0.
I’m utterly devastated to now find myself in agreement with a plethora of Leave backing politicians that Brexit could mean Norway, Canada, a different deal altogether, or WTO terms (and possibly others).

Quote:
Oh I see now.......they ceded their power to the electorate in 2016. But the electorate got it wrong, in their opinion, so now the all wise parliament will reverse the will of the people.

That’s as Orwellian as it gets. Certainly not the country I thought I was living in.
Welcome to the United Kingdom. :)

Mick 09-12-2018 18:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35974409)
Usually, when you leave your house, you know where you’re going and how to get there - that doesn’t seem to be the case for Brexit.

Brexit means Brexit is as meaningless a statement as Breakfast means Breakfast - if you asked 17 million people who said “Yes” when they were asked if they wanted breakfast, there would be no unanimity about what and when they wanted it. Some would want it at 6am, others 10am, and the rest some time in between; as for what they wanted for breakfast, the food requirements would range from toast, full English, granola, scrambled eggs, and multiple other options - to assert that all 17 million “Yes” voters wanted a Hard Brexit with "No Deal" is an assertion that cannot be backed up with factual evidence.

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:00 ----------

I blame Leavers for Brexit stalling 1,000% - they didn’t have a plan to get what they wanted and just blame everyone else.

See - two can play that game...
Only thing is, you lost your bloody game ! :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 18:47 ---------- Previous post was at 18:41 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35974409)
Usually, when you leave your house, you know where you’re going and how to get there - that doesn’t seem to be the case for Brexit.

Brexit means Brexit is as meaningless a statement as Breakfast means Breakfast - if you asked 17 million people who said “Yes” when they were asked if they wanted breakfast, there would be no unanimity about what and when they wanted it. Some would want it at 6am, others 10am, and the rest some time in between; as for what they wanted for breakfast, the food requirements would range from toast, full English, granola, scrambled eggs, and multiple other options - to assert that all 17 million “Yes” voters wanted a Hard Brexit with "No Deal" is an assertion that cannot be backed up with factual evidence
More rubbish - How many more piss poor analogies are you going to come up with to try justify your baseless points ?

Damien 09-12-2018 19:04
Re: Brexit
 
This topic is far angrier than it needs to be

denphone 09-12-2018 19:10
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35974418)
This topic is far angrier than it needs to be
The trouble is if one has a different view Damien to somebody else’s view then the usual reply of one is talking gibberish is the default response to it.

Gavin78 09-12-2018 19:11
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974405)



They are there to make the tough choices the people can’t be trusted with on a day to day basis.

Oh you mean a PM that was for voting remain who overruled her own cheif brexit negotiator far too many times to try and keep us as much in the EU as she could

Hom3r 09-12-2018 19:56
Re: Brexit
 
I see Channel 4 Brexit debate is pro remain, and the green party bint will wants 3rd vote 4th vote etc until they get a remain vote.

---------- Post added at 19:56 ---------- Previous post was at 19:51 ----------

Changing your mind is no reason to have a 2nd referendum.

jfman 09-12-2018 20:12
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35974418)
This topic is far angrier than it needs to be
If you think it’s bad now we still have another few weeks before a second referendum can realistically be presented as “the only choice”. Then we will have this throughout the campaign.

---------- Post added at 20:12 ---------- Previous post was at 20:12 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 35974420)
Oh you mean a PM that was for voting remain who overruled her own cheif brexit negotiator far too many times to try and keep us as much in the EU as she could
Doing her duty for the country.

Matth 09-12-2018 20:28
Re: Brexit
 
The letters need to go in to get rid of May. Cannot think of a more bumbling incompetent PM that has ever been, what with throwing away a majority on an ill judged election, and then flogging a dead horse "deal" that leaves us in thrall to the whims of the EU for ever more...

The PM to implement Brexit should never have come from the remainer camp

jfman 09-12-2018 20:59
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matth (Post 35974428)
The letters need to go in to get rid of May. Cannot think of a more bumbling incompetent PM that has ever been, what with throwing away a majority on an ill judged election, and then flogging a dead horse "deal" that leaves us in thrall to the whims of the EU for ever more...

The PM to implement Brexit should never have come from the remainer camp
However the letters won’t go, because even all but the most extreme in the leave camp know that Brexit is hugely damaging to this country.

It can’t be that hard to get 48 Conservative MPs, can it?

Mr K 09-12-2018 21:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matth (Post 35974428)
The letters need to go in to get rid of May. Cannot think of a more bumbling incompetent PM that has ever been, what with throwing away a majority on an ill judged election, and then flogging a dead horse "deal" that leaves us in thrall to the whims of the EU for ever more...

The PM to implement Brexit should never have come from the remainer camp
She was elected unopposed. So end of story, the Tories made their own choice, unanimously, which is a change for them !

---------- Post added at 21:30 ---------- Previous post was at 21:28 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35974424)
I see Channel 4 Brexit debate is pro remain, and the green party bint will wants 3rd vote 4th vote etc until they get a remain vote.

---------- Post added at 19:56 ---------- Previous post was at 19:51 ----------

Changing your mind is no reason to have a 2nd referendum.
Just reflecting the country atm, the wheel has turned...... (p.s i think you'll find 'bint' isn't politically correct !)

1andrew1 09-12-2018 21:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974372)
If there was a single coherent view of what Brexit should look like we wouldn’t be in this mess.
:gpoint:

---------- Post added at 21:34 ---------- Previous post was at 21:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35974404)
Thats a bit harsh on Arron Banks- he got a lot more than that...
:D:D:D

Mr K 09-12-2018 21:46
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35974418)
This topic is far angrier than it needs to be
True, but people have a right to be angry if they want. The future of the country and our kids is at stake after all.

Most of the 'angryness' has come from Brexiters and they supposedly 'won' !
Maybe they've realised what a daft mistake they've made , believing the lies. Their main champion is Boris, who was pathetic on Marr this morning. He promised to take responsibility for the repercussions of Brexit - even he wasn't convinced... You can be sure he'll be ok, like most of these affluent Brexiteers, power is all they were really after. Like Mogg, they'll have moved their investments overseas already.

Hugh 09-12-2018 22:03
Re: Brexit
 
From Nick Robinson on Twitter at 21:57

Quote:
PM called both Tusk & Veradkar today & the word from Whitehall is that the Brexit vote still might not happen on Tuesday. So perhaps Plan B, Plan A+ or Plan A- is being worked up

jfman 09-12-2018 22:15
Re: Brexit
 
Shambles.

Mick 09-12-2018 23:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974440)
True, but people have a right to be angry if they want. The future of the country and our kids is at stake after all.

Most of the 'angryness' has come from Brexiters and they supposedly 'won' !
Maybe they've realised what a daft mistake they've made , believing the lies. Their main champion is Boris, who was pathetic on Marr this morning. He promised to take responsibility for the repercussions of Brexit - even he wasn't convinced... You can be sure he'll be ok, like most of these affluent Brexiteers, power is all they were really after. Like Mogg, they'll have moved their investments overseas already.
No, we didn’t believe the lies told from the Remain camp and still don’t and never will.

Dave42 09-12-2018 23:40
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974452)
No, we didn’t believe the lies told from the Remain camp and still don’t and never will.
but all the lies the leavers said are fine right

1andrew1 10-12-2018 00:04
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974452)
No, we didn’t believe the lies told from the Remain camp and still don’t and never will.
No one should believe lies...period. But in an era of fake news and deliberate misinformation, determining what is truthful can be hard.

Carth 10-12-2018 01:08
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35974440)
<snip>
Most of the 'angryness' has come from Brexiters

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

oh stop it, you're killing me, funniest thing since del boy fell through the hatch :D

Sephiroth 10-12-2018 03:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974405)
It’s not convoluted nonsense.

The English language is more complex than the binary choice you are seeking to frame my statement in.

<SNIP>
You're still dodging the answer to a simple question. If the vast majority of the electorate don't deserve to be punished, then who does deserve to be punished?

denphone 10-12-2018 05:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35974446)
Shambles.
That is a considerable understatement..


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:55.
Page 46 of 89 « First 3642434445 46 4748495056 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum