|
|
Post by Peroni on Mar 13, 2019 11:05:50 GMT
They don't want us, or any other countries who will be watching on and thinking of doing the same, to leave.
Doesnt sound like a very nice friendship group or one that sensible people would want to be part of ! |
|
|
|
Post by Palms Halt on Mar 13, 2019 11:07:41 GMT
They don't want us, or any other countries who will be watching on and thinking of doing the same, to leave.
Doesnt sound like a very nice friendship group or one that sensible people would want to be part of ! Any club isn't going to give great benefits to non-members, else what's the point in being a member? |
|
FASH
Senior Member
Posts: 2,157
|
Post by FASH on Mar 13, 2019 11:30:48 GMT
No, the people we've elected to make the decisions for us, from their supposedly better informed positions, should make the right choice for the country themselves. I they're incapable of doing that then they should resign from parliament and have a by-election to replace them with somebody who is capable. And talking of which, our very own MP seems to be too busy towing the party line to boost his career opportunities within the Tory party to be voting in the country's greater interest toeing |
|
|
|
Post by Palms Halt on Mar 13, 2019 11:47:54 GMT
And talking of which, our very own MP seems to be too busy towing the party line to boost his career opportunities within the Tory party to be voting in the country's greater interest toeing Good spot Giovanni. Or is it Claudio? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 11:54:56 GMT
They did. 500 out of 650 MPs voted to Remain. They are better informed than the proletariate. The government advised that proletariate to Remain. They didn't. proletariat An incorrect interruption. Surprised you wouldn't know that particular one. |
|
|
|
Post by eggchaserbull on Mar 13, 2019 14:54:45 GMT
An incorrect interruption. Surprised you wouldn't know that particular one. Come on, ww; although correct, there's only you and Jacob Rees Mogg who spell it that way.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gresty on Mar 13, 2019 15:12:55 GMT
An incorrect interruption. Surprised you wouldn't know that particular one. Come on, ww; although correct, there's only you and Jacob Rees Mogg who spell it that way. Jacobe!! 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by eggchaserbull on Mar 13, 2019 15:38:01 GMT
Prominent Leave proponents, Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Fox, Davis, Redwood, all had the chance to put their hat into the ring to lead the UK out of the EU.
Below are some of their comments on how easy the process would be
"The day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want." Michael Gove, April 2016
"Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards." John Redwood, July 2016
" It is like threading the eye of a needle. If you have a good eye and a steady hand, it is easy enough," David Davis, December 2016, dismissing fears a Brexit deal might be difficult
"Trade relations with the EU could be sorted out in 'an afternoon over a cup of coffee," Gerard Batten, UKIP Brexit spokesman, February 2017
Coming to a free trade agreement with the EU should be "one of the easiest in human history." Liam Fox, July 2017
" ... if we take a bit more of that approach, a bit more unity of purpose, we’ll get a great result out of Brexit. We’ll also unite the country." Dominic Raab, June 2018
The UK voters were given such Brexit slogans as, "Let's take back control," "Return sovereignty to the UK Parliament."
The UK parliament has shown, over the last couple of years, that they should be nowhere near the control, or make sovereign decisions (sovereignty was never taken away, so could not be returned).
I'd rather be governed by politicians who know what they're doing, like the EU Commissioners and civil servants who have kicked the sh!te out of the UK politicians and civil servants in the negotiations. For those of you who will bray "but they're not elected," they are, in a more democratic way than the UK cabinet is selected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 20:36:11 GMT
What a shambles..what a feckin shambles.
I'll be livid if Theresa May brings her same crap deal back for a third time.
Even Farage has said its better to stay in the EU than take the WA deal May "negotiated".
Gotta be another General Election for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Monkey Tennis on Mar 13, 2019 20:47:21 GMT
All getting very worrying now, this. And all so completely avoidable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Differentiabull on Mar 13, 2019 20:58:38 GMT
What a shambles..what a feckin shambles. I'll be livid if Theresa May brings her same crap deal back for a third time. Even Farage has said its better to stay in the EU than take the WA deal May "negotiated". Gotta be another General Election for me. But how does a general election solve this? Particularly when both labour and the Tories are likely to stand on platforms of some sort Brexit, which probably aren't achievable - or at least untested with the EU. And, so, like the last election, labour would probably turn it into an election on other issues. We might have a slightly different colour of government, but we'd be back where we are now on Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by colebridgebull on Mar 13, 2019 21:06:39 GMT
The only remaining option is to revoke Article 50.
No other resolution.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 21:22:36 GMT
What a shambles..what a feckin shambles. I'll be livid if Theresa May brings her same crap deal back for a third time. Even Farage has said its better to stay in the EU than take the WA deal May "negotiated". Gotta be another General Election for me. But how does a general election solve this? Particularly when both labour and the Tories are likely to stand on platforms of some sort Brexit, which probably aren't achievable - or at least untested with the EU. And, so, like the last election, labour would probably turn it into an election on other issues. We might have a slightly different colour of government, but we'd be back where we are now on Brexit. You would hope, on an individual candidate level rather than party lines. With some honesty (pfft, i know) about what the backed outcome was likely to mean to the voter. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 21:28:58 GMT
For me it is important that democracy prevails.
However, I'm firmly against the WA May has come back with in that is quite plainly a worse option than staying in the EU.
It has now become imperative that May doesn't get this deal through because its something nobody voted for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 21:31:18 GMT
It would be pathetic if she got this through by agreeing to stand down. Absolutely pathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Differentiabull on Mar 13, 2019 21:42:53 GMT
The only remaining option is to revoke Article 50. No other resolution. But only after some sort of public vote. There is no outcome here that 'heals' the country, but one where politicians ask the people if they want to leave the EU, the people say yes (directly in a referendum and indirectly via a GE), only for the politicians to unilaterally decided not to do that, is about as ugly as it can get. If one of the EU27 vetoes any sort of extension, then I agree that revoking Article 50 has to happen within the next fortnight, as that's the only way to avoid a no-deal exit - but as a long term solution, I don't think it works without some other specific mandate. What happens next? Do we invoke Article 50 again and spend another 2 years on another attempt? Without some new decision from the people between realistic, achievable outcomes, we're going to be talking about this for years and years and years. Leaving under the terms promised during the referendum is not possible. We must give the people the choice between what is possible, and include the option for the deal we already have. If we then decide to remain, then it'll be ugly, but at least it's decided by the people. If we vote to leave again, this time specifically via a realistic and achievable option (a deal, or 'no deal'), then there's a specific mandate to doing that. At the moment, the HoC is hamstrung by different interpretations of 'what the people voted for'. We don't know what people voted for. There's only one way to find that out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 21:51:48 GMT
If I were the EU I'd be siding with the dutch guys opinion, no fecking extension.
Revoke it. General Election. Get candidates to say "I will back out Deal or No Deal" / "I will back EU sanctioned WA to guarantee out with no dire consequences" / " I will keep us in the EU"
The End for Tories and Labour
|
|
|
|
Post by Differentiabull on Mar 13, 2019 22:02:39 GMT
But how does a general election solve this? Particularly when both labour and the Tories are likely to stand on platforms of some sort Brexit, which probably aren't achievable - or at least untested with the EU. And, so, like the last election, labour would probably turn it into an election on other issues. We might have a slightly different colour of government, but we'd be back where we are now on Brexit. You would hope, on an individual candidate level rather than party lines. With some honesty (pfft, i know) about what the backed outcome was likely to mean to the voter. Not sure I understand. You mean almost as if parties allow their candidates a 'free vote' on Brexit within their manifesto, so we'd effectively have 650 mini-referendums on Brexit. And then take the temperature from that? Sounds tricky if so. I think we only make progress here if we can somehow remove the numbers of options available. Not allow more to proliferate. It also requires MPs to not actually be self-serving as well. While I'm not one of the 'sack em all, useless pricks, noses in the troughs' types, there's an element of inevitable human condition to recognise that they're people with life commitments who want to keep their jobs. Any democratic event that leaves the desired outcome open for interpretation takes us no further to solving Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by lazarus on Mar 13, 2019 22:09:57 GMT
The only remaining option is to revoke Article 50. No other resolution. In all future elections the party that comes second will be deemed to have won. What a shabby place a once Great Country has become. |
|
|
|
Post by colebridgebull on Mar 13, 2019 22:20:50 GMT
Erm...no.
That's a ridiculous analogy.
The referendum in 2016 provided a binary choice. No-one actually applied their minds on the Leave side as to how to actually deliver Brexit. It's now become clear that it is undeliverable in any form that is not deeply damaging to the country.
This is a shambolic failure. As such, the grown up thing to do is to call the whole farce off and actually spend time repairing the country. No-one won. Because there was never anything to win that we didn't already have. Surely even the most ardent Brexiteer must now see that. Don't they...?
|
|
