Brexit (Old)

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well Parliament are meant to be the one making decisions in our system anyway. I would be happy never to have a referendum on anything ever again.

Well yes, the public do come up with daft answers for the wrong reasons in referendums...

Do you want PR to make sure your vote means something ? "Err No, you're alright."

Do you want you and your families futures to be poorer, and less certain (and get rid of those bleeding immigrants) ? " Ok then !"

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Interesting TM would allow a second vote for MPs but not for the public !

Remainers didn't know what they voted for in 2016, that's what they keep telling us,so how can they vote again if they haven't yet grasped what they voted for the first time .

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Remainers didn't know what they voted for in 2016, that's what they keep telling us,so how can they vote again if they haven't yet grasped what they voted for the first time .

Remainers?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’ve expected this for some time. As stated earlier, Parliament is sovereign and can unbind itself if there’s the political will to do so. I’d go so far as to say the will is clear, it’s the political expedience of who takes the fall that’s the problem.

Parliament voted for article 50, by an overwhelming majority because it had a direct mandate from the electorate to do so.

It does not have such a mandate to undo Article 50, it would the greatest betrayal of democracy this country has ever seen.

The only way parliament could revoke Article 50 would be after another referendum.

If the vote doesn’t go through a second referendum is looking like an inevitability.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Remainers didn't know what they voted for in 2016, that's what they keep telling us,so how can they vote again if they haven't yet grasped what they voted for the first time .

You've lost me there Smurf. Remaining we knew what we were getting. Brexit was an unknown quantity and still, amazingly after 2 years, is.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

My personal duty to Queen and country isn’t bound but your interpretation of the user base of CF.

Indeed you don’t know if I’m a journalist.

Don’t know and don’t care.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Remainers didn't know what they voted for in 2016, that's what they keep telling us,so how can they vote again if they haven't yet grasped what they voted for the first time .

l knew exactly what l voted for but at the end of the day one has to accept the results of democracy no matter how unhappy one is with the result but that does not mean HMG or the opposition should be excused from the complete omnishambles that has followed thereafter..

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Parliament voted for article 50, by an overwhelming majority because it had a direct mandate from the electorate to do so.

It does not have such a mandate to undo Article 50, it would the greatest betrayal of democracy this country has ever seen.

The only way parliament could revoke Article 50 would be after another referendum.

If the vote doesn’t go through a second referendum is looking like an inevitability.

I agree with all of that in practice.

(On a technical legal note the Govermment invoked A50, and if the Court of Session on the advice of ECJ allows unilateral withdrawal of A50, the Government can withdraw A50 without either an electoral or Parliamentary mandate to do so. It’s the prerogative of Government alone, however it’s unlikely to act without Parliamentary approval - that’d be a further , and more obvious, constitutional crisis)

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Your comparison doesn’t baseline 100%.

Your flawed interpretation implies that if one economy has 10% growth and another 9% less growth its “91%” of that growth.

100-110
100-109.1

When commentators use 9% less its baselined. So rather than 110% of the original size they mean 101%, or just 10% of the growth experienced elsewhere.

<SNIP>

I'd better concede your point having re-examined the BBC graph. It headlines that the graph shows the impact on "UK growth; this was the basis of my postulation.

The text of the graph refers to the "impact on GDP" which is a different metric. On that basis, you are right.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Don’t know and don’t care.

That’s your entire approach to Brexit. As long as we restrict immigration.

---------- Post added at 20:38 ---------- Previous post was at 20:35 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I'd better concede your point having re-examined the BBC graph. It headlines that the graph shows the impact on "UK growth; this was the basis of my postulation.

The text of the graph refers to the "impact on GDP" which is a different metric. On that basis, you are right.

Thank you for your polite, and constructive, concession on this point.

---------- Post added at 20:42 ---------- Previous post was at 20:38 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

l knew exactly what l voted for but at the end of the day one has to accept the results of democracy no matter how unhappy one is with the result but that does not mean HMG or the opposition should be excused from the complete omnishambles that has followed thereafter..

People who voted remain voted for a boring and ordinary outcome. It didn’t require huge amounts of research.

Yes we are a net contributor to the less affluent EU states but that was always part of the deal. Indeed, it was intended to mitigate significant migration, improve living standards and opportunities across the entire Union.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Remainers didn't know what they voted for in 2016, that's what they keep telling us,so how can they vote again if they haven't yet grasped what they voted for the first time .

Eh? I would like to say I knew very much what I voted for in 2016. The principles behind my decision to vote remain were;

Principles of international cooperation
Ease of trade with our closest geographic neighbours, enhancing the gravity model of trade
Opportunities for my kids when they get older

What has changed since then is I have gained a deeper understanding of international trade, economics and of course a forum favourite, the Good Friday Agreement. This has firmed up the first two points above for me.

As I have said before, if we have to leave, then that’s it but let’s leave with the least amount of damage.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Eh? I would like to say I knew very much what I voted for in 2016. The principles behind my decision to vote remain were;

Principles of international cooperation
Ease of trade with our closest geographic neighbours, enhancing the gravity model of trade
Opportunities for my kids when they get older

What has changed since then is I have gained a deeper understanding of international trade, economics and of course a forum favourite, the Good Friday Agreement. This has firmed up the first two points above for me.

As I have said before, if we have to leave, then that’s it but let’s leave with the least amount of damage.

exactly

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

jfman's post above #4018, if it is representative of the remoaner community, clearly suggests that they do not want the best for this country at all.

Why do you insist on the childish narrative? You need to appreciate that the point that others have different views that, in their eyes, are as equally valid as yours.

You task is to persuade through reasoned debate why they are wrong and you are right. The childish name calling and accusations of treason do not fall into this category I am afraid.

---------- Post added at 22:03 ---------- Previous post was at 21:58 ----------

Originally Posted by pip08456

Finally you have seen the light!

The financial forecasts are hypothetical and nothing more.

You cannot be serious surely? The City of London underwrites it's core business on financial modelling and forecasting. When you next look at your Pension investments, you may want to take the money out and put it under the mattress!

Or maybe it is just the forecasts that you don't agree with?

---------- Post added at 22:11 ---------- Previous post was at 22:03 ----------

The moves to block the route to No Deal are in play:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...no-deal-brexit

Theresa May’s plans to get her Brexit deal through parliament ran into fresh difficulties on Friday as it emerged that a “no to no deal” amendment submitted by Labour’s Hilary Benn with the support of two Tories had won the backing of the SNP and Lib Dems.

Joanna Cherry, an SNP frontbench MP, said her party’s 35 MPs would support Benn’s “excellent” amendment, which rejects both May’s deal and a no-deal Brexit and gives parliament a say in what the government would do next.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

At least Brexiteers want the best for this country and can see many opportunities for increased trade and reduced prices for products coming in, free of the protectionist tariffs put in place by the EU.

jfman's post above #4018, if it is representative of the remoaner community, clearly suggests that they do not want the best for this country at all.

I actually missed this first time around. I totally object to your use of remoaner. I've said many times I voted to remain, although will financially benefit from a disorderly Brexit.

You have been unable to quantify that the best thing for this country is leaving at all. Until that time, which I expect to be the day after Elon Musk dies on Mars, it's a perfectly legitimate point for anyone to hold that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland remain part of the European Union.

Indeed, legitimately, that the deal on the table furthers the cause of Irish reunification and perhaps even Scottish independence. I don't see what is patriotic about the death of our great nation.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well Parliament are meant to be the one making decisions in our system anyway. I would be happy never to have a referendum on anything ever again.

Abolish referendums? You'd have to put that to the people first though